TAX  THE  AREA 


A  SOLUTION  OF  THE  LAND  PROBLEM 


BY 


KEMPER  BOCOCK 


fe&K3’- 


S  ..  * 

.  4s  ‘  -I 


U  .  • 

;V  .  '}  • 


NEW  YORK 

JOHN  W.  LOVELL  COMPANY. 
14  and  16  Vesey  Street. 


3fy<2.‘  '2~ 


Copyright, 

1887, 

By  KEMPER  BOCOCK. 


TROWS 

PHI  NT*  NO  AND  BOOKBINDING  COMPANY, 
NEW  YORK, 


PREFACE. 


The  publication  of  this  work  has  two  purposes : 
First,  it  is  designed  to  show  that  the  “  unearned 
increment”  is  unearned  by  the  community  instead 
of  by  the  individual ;  and  second,  that  the  substitu¬ 
tion  of  specific  taxes  for  value  taxes  on  land  would 
meet  the  chief  demand  for  land  reform.  Since  its 
preparation  for  the  press,  Mr.  Henry  George,  the 
leading  advocate  of  unearned  increment  taxation, 
has  disclaimed  sympathy  with  thorough-going  social¬ 
ism.  By  so  doing  he  virtually  abandons  his  own 
theory :  for  the  only  conceivable  circumstances  under 
which  the  community  could  have  the  right  to  tax 
the  unearned  increment  of  value  would  be  the  condi¬ 
tions  of  perfect  socialism,  under  which  the  commu¬ 
nity  would  be  the  creator  of  all  such  value,  through 
its  direct  control  and  operation  of  the  forces  of 
development,  production,  and  distribution. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE. 

CHAPTER  I. 

The  Problem  Stated,  .  .  .  .5 

CHAPTER  II. 

Is  Private  Ownership  of  I  and  Right  ?  .  12 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Rights  of  the  Individual,  .  .  .31 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Ad  Valorem  and  Specific  Taxation,  .  .  45 

CHAPTER  V. 


Practicability  of  Area  Taxation, 


72 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  PROBLEM  STATED. 

“  The  perfect  moral  principle,  ‘  whatsoever  ye  would  that 
men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them,’  is  the  unwritten 
constitution  of  every  free  people,  and  is  at  the  foundation  of 
every  demand  for  fair  play.  No  perfect  social  condition  can  be 
attained  without  its  general  acceptance  in  spirit  and  enforce¬ 
ment  in  letter.” 


WHAT  is  the  land  problem  ? 

It  is  not  “  shall  the  use  of  the  earth  be  regu¬ 
lated  by  the  government  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole 
people,”  but  “  how  shall  the  use  of  the  earth  be  reg¬ 
ulated  by  the  government  for  the  benefit  of  the 
whole  people  ?  ” 

For  its  use  is  already  regulated  by  the  govern¬ 
ment.  The  right  of  regulation  is  asserted  whenever 
the  right  of  eminent  domain  enables  a  railroad  com¬ 
pany  to  build  tracks  across  a  man’s  farm,  paying 
him  somebody  else’s  price  instead  of  his  own.  It  is 
asserted  whenever  a  landlord,  aided  by  constables 
or  deputy-sheriffs — paid  servants  of  the  community 


6 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


— evicts  a  tenant  for  non-payment  of  rent.  Some¬ 
times  this  regulation  is  for  the  benefit  of  the  whole 
people,  and  sometimes  it  is  not.  It  depends  on 
circumstances.  The  present  system  of  land  tenure 
is  not  a  grand  structure,  fashioned  after  the  design 
of  an  intelligent,  honest  and  well-meaning  architect; 
but  the  patch-work  result  of  a  process  of  evolution 
that  has  been  going  on  for  many  centuries.  Much 
that  is  of  the  fittest  has  survived  ;  but  the  unfit  is 
not  all  dead. 

The  right  of  eminent  domain  has  survived,  and  is 
to-day  stronger  than  ever  before.  But  its  strength 
should  be  maintained  in  harmony  with  the  progress 
of  civilization.  Civilization  began  with  the  rule  of 
“might  makes  right  ”  and  has  attained  the  rule  of 
“  light  makes  might.”  Brute  force  has  been  com¬ 
pelled  to  surrender  to  advanced  intelligence.  But 
civilization  will  be  a  failure  if  advanced  intelligence 
does  not  mean  advanced  justice.  It  must  not  stop 
until  it  realizes  the  rule  of  “  right  makes  light.” 
The  institution  of  eminent  domain  can  not  survive 
unless  it  survives  as  a  right,  and  to  fulfill  that 
requirement  it  must  not  only  be  intrinsically  right, 
but  must  be  exercised  in  harmony  with  every  inci¬ 
dental  right.  Not  one  must  be  amputated.  Man 
needs  every  right  he  has,  in  order  to  attain  perfect 
development,  and  he  has  a  right  to  cultivate  every 
faculty  of  his  nature  under  proper  conditions. 


THE  PROBLEM  STATED. 


7 


Proper  conditions  are  simply  those  under  which  no 
man  is  allowed  to  interfere  with  the  exercise  of  any 
right  of  any  fellow-man. 

Unrestricted  landlordism  is  not  one  of  these 
proper  conditions.  No  one  asserts  that  it  is,  and 
no  proof  to  the  contrary  is  needed.  Whatever  may 
be  a  landlord’s  practice,  he  is  seldom — in  this  coun¬ 
try  at  least — a  believer  in  and  an  advocate  of  ten¬ 
antry  as  the  most  desirable  condition  for  the  mass 
of  the  people.  It  is  desirable  that  there  should  be 
enough  tenants  in  the  world  to  make  the  competi¬ 
tion  for  his  houses  as  sharp  as  possible;  but  he 
cares  nothing  for  landlordism  in  other  parts  of  the 
world,  beyond  the  limits  within  which  other  parts 
of  the  world  may  invite  his  tenants  to  emigrate  and 
reduce  his  rent-roll.  Whatever  differences  of  opin¬ 
ion  may  exist  as  to  methods,  land  monopoly  in  the 
abstract  is  odious  to  “  the  common  sense  of  most.” 

The  evils  of  land  monopoly  have  been  too  exhaust¬ 
ively  discussed  by  Henry  George,  in  “  Progress  and 
Poverty,”  and  elsewhere  since  that  remarkable  work 
was  published,  to  require  extended  study  here.  A 
large  library  of  destructive  criticism  has  been  printed 
within  a  few  years.  Mr.  George  has  been  trying  to 
destroy  individual  landlordism,  and  to  substitute 
social  landlordism  for  it,  and  his  critics  have  gen¬ 
erally  taken  up  the  cudgels  for  individual  landlord¬ 
ism  and  tried  to  destroy  Mr.  George.  But  all  land- 


8 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


lordism  should  be  destroyed,  so  far  as  it  takes  two 
to  make  a  landlord — the  landlord  himself  and  the 
tenant.  That  is  the  sense  in  which  the  word  land¬ 
lordism  is  generally  understood,  and  it  may  be 
doubted  if  any  less  odious  signification  will  ever 
take  possession  of  it.  There  will  probably  be  no 
such  word  as  landlord  if  the  time  should  ever  come 
when  the  motto  “  Every  man  his  own  landlord," 
will  be  realized. 

What  does  landlordism,  in  the  commonly  received 
sense  of  “  one  who  has  tenants,"  tend  to  imply  ? 
What  does  it  involve  when  allowed  to  work  out  its 
legitimate  results  ?  The  control  of  the  few  over 
opportunities  of  labor  for  the  many ;  the  control  of 
the  few  over  the  means  of  securing  justice  for  the 
many ;  the  restriction  of  the  exercise  of  all  the 
rights  of  the  many  by  the  will  of  the  few ;  in  short, 
aristocracy. 

If  landlordism  is  to  be  perpetuated,  government 
landlordism  is  by  all  odds  the  best  form  of  it  to 
perpetuate,  for  government  is  tending  to  be  more 
responsive  to  the  will  of  the  whole  people,  and, 
with  the  growth  of  popular  intelligence  and  the 
average  power  of  perceiving  popular  rights,  it  is 
continually  seeking  to  promote  the  welfare  of  the 
whole  people.  But  the  progress  of  all  governments 
towards  the  realization  of  a  general  policy  of  univer¬ 
sal  justice  is  slow — very  slow.  We  have  by  no 


THE  PROBLEM  STATED. 


9 


means  found  a  way  to  dispense  with  this  new  appli¬ 
cation  of  an  old  maxim :  “  If  you  want  something 
done,  get  the  government  to  do  it ;  if  you  want  it 
done  well,  do  it  yourself.” 

The  government  is  a  big  thing,  in  our  advanced 
stage  of  civilization,  and,  leaving  out  of  the  ques¬ 
tion  all  possibility  of  its  assumption  of  active  con¬ 
trol  of  the  land  in  its  jurisdiction,  it  is  growing  big¬ 
ger  all  the  time  instead  of  growing  smaller.  Its 
machinery,  in  our  own  country,  with  its  variously 
distributed  centers  of  authority — national,  state  and 
local — is  already  so  complicated  that  the  ambition 
to  hold  office  is  one  of  the  gravest  evils  of  the  day. 
The  unrestricted  development  of  this  ambition  is 
already  so  demoralizing  as  to  compel  the  organi¬ 
zation  of  civil  service  reform  associations,  and  the 
professed  adoption  of  civil  service  reform  as  a  policy 
by  both  of  our  great  national  parties  in  their  quad¬ 
rennial  platforms. 

These  considerations  cause  grave  doubts  as  to 
whether  it  is  advisable  at  any  time  to  increase,  on  a 
large  scale,  the  machinery  of  the  government,  and 
thus  to  increase  likewise  the  temptations  (which  the 
multiplication  of  official  places  would  hold  out  to  the 
youth  of  the  land)  to  shirk  the  duty  of  seriously 
studying  a  trade,  a  profession,  or  some  other  form 
of  private  business,  dependent  on  the  fluctuations  of 
commerce,  for  the  sake  of  seeking  the  more  securely 


IO 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


remunerative  and  easily  performed  duties  of  a 
routine  public  official  life.  The  more  of  such  offi¬ 
cial  places  there  are,  the  greater  will  be  the  tempta* 
tions  and  the  strength  of  the  spoils  system  of  pol¬ 
itics. 

Let  us,  instead,  seek  to  make  it  easier  to  be  an 
honest,  intelligent,  and  prosperous  private  citizen. 
However  wide  the  sphere  of  governmental  control 
may  become,  safety  lies  in  keeping  the  sphere  of  the 
private  citizen  wider,  so  that  he  may  be  more  dis¬ 
posed  to  cultivate  the  bent  of  his  intellectual  nature, 
and  attain  a  suitable  average  of  fitness  for  the  per¬ 
petual  duty  of  universal  suffrage.  The  servant  must 
not  be  permitted  to  get  above  his  lord.  The  official 
must  never  either  outweigh  or  outnumber  the  pri¬ 
vate  citizen. 

Those  who  would  solve  the  land  problem  can  least 
of  all  afford  to  forget  the  rights  of  the  private  citi¬ 
zen  in  the  premises.  It  is  claimed,  and  rightly,  that 
this  problem  is  second  to  none  in  importance,  and 
that  on  its  right  solution  depends  the  greatest  good 
of  the  greater  number,  for  labor  and  capital  are 
alike  at  the  mercy  of  the  landlord.  Its  solution 
should  be  sought  by  the  speediest  route ;  and  those 
who  seek  it  can  not  afford  to  sacrifice  any  existing 
institution  that  can  help  them  to  attain  their  end. 
Every  existing  institution  that  can  have  any  bearing 
on  the  question  should  be  examined,  in  order  to  see 


THE  PROBLEM  STATED. 


II 


if  it  has  in  it  any  thing  good  enough  to  keep ;  not 
merely  actual  good,  but  possible  good  as  well.  The 
institution  that  is  easily  first  in  its  claims  on  the 
attention  of  those  who  are  asking  themselves  and 
others  the  land  question,  is  tne  institution  of  private 
property  in  land. 


CHAPTER  II. 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGHT? 

They  shall  sit  every  man  under  his  vine  and  under  his  fig- 
tree,  and  none  shall  make  them  afraid.” — Micah. 

HE  justice  of  private  property  in  land  does  not 


X  depend  on  the  title  of  the  first  man  who 
claimed  it,  any  more  than  it  depends  on  some  other 
man’s  title  to  the  farm  which  he  occupies  to-day.  It 
depends  rather  on  general  considerations.  In  order 
to  learn  whether  private  property  in  land  can  by  any 
possibility  be  a  right,  we  must  examine  the  idea  of 
right,  and  see  wdiat  “  a  right  ”  is. 

In  general,  a  man  has  a  right  to  be  or  to  do 
that  which  he  can  be  or  do  without  injury 
to  himself  or  any  other  man.  We  are  so  con¬ 
stituted  that  self-assertion  is  a  necessity  of  our 
nature.  Every  man  has  a  right  to  live,  rather  than 
merely  to  exist ;  to  cultivate  his  intellectual  and 
moral  nature  to  the  utmost,  as  well  as  to  gratify  his 
animal  wants.  If  he  can  own  land  without  interfer¬ 
ing  with  the  right  of  any  one  else  to  live  and  to  own 
land  if  desired,  then  it  is  right  to  own  land  ;  that  is, 
it  is  not  wrong.  If  the  private  ownership  of  land  is 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGHT?  13 

not  merely  not  wrong,  but  expedient  because 
tending  to  make  it  easier  for  every  man  to  live 
and  to  cultivate  his  intellectual  and  moral  nature, 
it  is  not  only  not  wrong  to  own  land  ;  it  is  wrong 
not  to  own  it.  It  is  wrong  not  to  seek  by  every 
legitimate  means  to  attain  the  ownership  of  land, 
and  it  is  wrong  not  to  make  the  ownership  of  land 
easy. 

The  right  of  private  property  in  land,  if  there  is 
such  a  right,  must  depend  on  permanent  conditions. 
The  area  of  land  on  the  globe  is  practically  the 
same  at  all  times.  The  population  that  must  live 
on  it  tends  to  increase  continually.  Whether  this 
tendency  will  ever  be  arrested,  we  can  not  foresee. 
We  have  no  right  to  assume  that  it  will.  Now  it  is 
plain  that  if  the  private  ownership  of  land  can  be 
perpetuated,  the  area  allotted  to  each  individual 
may  have  to  be  reduced  from  time  to  time ;  that  is, 
the  average  area.  If  a  farmer  has  a  farm  of  one 
hundred  acres  and  ten  sons,  there  are  ten  acres  for 
each  son.  If  each  son  is  married  and  has  ten  chil¬ 
dren,  there  will  no  longer  be  ten  acres  for  each 
descendant.  There  can  not  be  more  than  one  acre 
for  each  child,  on  a  fair  average. 

There  must  be  a  force,  or  a  set  of  forces,  at  work 
to  reduce  the  average  area  occupied  by  each  citizen 
or  inhabitant  of  the  world. 

Such  a  force  is  found  in  the  development  of  the 


14 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


arts  of  industry  and  commerce,  acting  according  to 
the  principle  of  the  division  of  labor.  A  part  of  the 
population  of  every  civilized  nation  produces  raw 
material  as  nature  affords  the  opportunity  ;  it  is  the 
duty  of  the  remaining  part  to  handle  that  raw  mate¬ 
rial,  to  work  it  up  into  useful  shapes,  and  to  dis¬ 
tribute  it  among  those  who  want  to  use  it.  The 
performance  of  this  duty  creates  centers  of  popula¬ 
tion  at  convenient  points,  and  as  the  wants  of  civili¬ 
zation  are  multiplied,  the  territory  covered  by 
cities  and  towns  increases  continually  at  the  expense 
of  the  rural  territory  under  cultivation  or  other  form 
of  productive  development.  The  population  is  thus 
divided  into  two  classes,  in  its  relation  to  the  sur¬ 
face  of  the  earth  :  the  first  class  consisting  of  those 
who  want  large  tracts  for  agricultural  or  mineral 
development,  and  the  second,  of  those  who  want 
building  sites.  The  average  building  site  will 
always  be  smaller  than  the  average  farm  ;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  if  the  utmost  freedom  of  develop¬ 
ment  is  insured  to  the  individual,  and  his  wants  mul¬ 
tiply  indefinitely  in  consequence,  the  proportion  of 
those  who  handle  and  work  up  raw  material  will 
increase  continually,  and  the  demand  for  building 
sites  will,  in  consequence,  outstrip  the  demand  for 
farm  land.  Thus,  even  if  there  is  no  permanent 
tendency  to  reduce  the  average  area  of  a  farm,  the 
increasing  demand  for  building  sites  will  reduce  the 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OP  LAND  RIGHT?  15 

average  area  of  the  earth’s  surface  required  for  the 
support  of  each  person  as  population  increases.  The 
inhabitants  of  the  United  States  employed  in  agri¬ 
cultural  pursuits  increased  twenty-nine  per  cent, 
between  the  census  of  1870  and  that  of  1880,  while 
the  number  of  those  engaged  in  other  pursuits 
increased  nearly  forty-one  per  cent.  The  number 
engaged  in  agricultural  pursuits  was  forty-seven  per 
cent,  of  the  total  in  1870  and  forty-four  in  1880, 
indicating  a  slight  decrease  in  the  ratio  of  farmers  to 
the  total  of  population  with  the  growth  of  the  latter 
and  the  development  of  the  country’s  industrial 
resources. 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  fulfillment  of  one  con¬ 
dition  required  to  prove  the  justice  of  private 
property  in  land.  The  natural  growth  of  civiliza¬ 
tion,  by  shifting  population  from  the  country  to  the 
city  and  town  faster  than  it  increases  in  the  aggre¬ 
gate,  reduces  the  average  area  required  per  capita. 
To  illustrate  this,  take  the  case  of  a  township  which 
contains  100  citizens  actively  engaged  in  various 
occupations.  Let  us  suppose  that  44  of  these  are 
farmers — the  percentage  of  the  census  of  1880 — 
with  farms  of  an  average  size  of  50  acres.  Suppose 
the  other  56  citizens  to  reside  on  lots  ranging  from 
50  x  100  feet  in  size  to  one  acre,  or  averaging,  say, 
one  quarter  of  an  acre.  The  farmers  will  then 
occupy  2200  acres  and  the  non-farmers  14  acres,  the 


1 6 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


total  area  of  the  township,  exclusive  of  roads  and 
streets,  being  2214  acres.  The  average  area  per 
capita  will  then  be  22.14  acres.  Now,  suppose  the 
population  increased  in  the  ratios  of  increase  pre¬ 
vailing  from  1870  to  1880.  An  increase  of  29  per 
cent,  in  the  number  of  farmers  will  bring  the  total 
up  to  57,  excluding  fractions;  and  an  increase  of  41 
per  cent,  in  the  number  of  non-farmers  actively 
engaged  will  bring  it  up  to  89.  The  average  area 
per  capita  will  then  be  15.16  acres;  but,  as  the 
added  number  of  non-farmers  will  only  reduce  the 
2200  acres  of  farm  land  by  33  quarter-acres,  or  8J/4 
acres,  there  will  still  be  2i9i3/4  acres  available  for 
farming  purposes,  and  the  average  farm  area  will  be 
38.45  acres.  In  other  words,  while  the  population 
is  increasing  at  the  rate  of  30  per  cent,  and  the 
working  population  at  the  rate  of  39  per  cent.,  the 
total  available  farm  area  undergoes  the  trifling 
reduction  of  .03 7  per  cent.,  and  the  average  area 
per  capita  required  decreases  at  the  same  time  31 
per  cent.,  or  faster  than  the  increase  of  population. 
There  is  apparently  no  reason  why  the  world  should 
not  afford  every  body  a  living,  even  when  every  man 
has  his  share  of  private  property  in  land.  We  hope 
to  show  that  to  enable  every  man  to  have  his  share 
would  develop  the  world’s  maximum  capacity  to 
sustain  life. 

“  But,”  Mr.  George  says,  “  man  has  no  share  of 


IS  PRIVA  TE  O  WNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGH  T?  17 

private  property  in  land.  He  is  entitled  to  none. 

*  Right  of  ownership  that  springs  from  labor  excludes7 
the  possibility  of  any  other  right  of  ownership.  If 
a  man  be  rightfully  entitled  to  the  produce  of  his 
labor,  then  no  one  can  be  rightfully  entitled  to  the 
ownership  of  any  thing  which  is  not  the  produce  of 
his  labor,  or  the  labor  of  some  one  else  from  whom 
the  right  has  passed  to  him.  If  production  give  to 
the  producer  the  right  to  exclusive  possession  and 
enjoyment,  there  can  rightfully  be  no  exclusive 
possession  and  enjoyment  of  any  thing  not  the  pro¬ 
duction  of  labor,  and  the  recognition  of  private 
property  in  land  is  wrong.  For  the  right  to  the 
produce  of  labor  can  not  be  enjoyed  without  the 
right  to  the  free  use  of  the  opportunities  offered  by 
nature,  and  to  admit  the  right  of  property  in  these 
is  to  deny  the  right  of  property  in  the  produce 
of  labor.’  ” — (“  Progress  and  Poverty,”  Book  VII., 
Chapter  I.) 

The  above  passage  discloses  the  vulnerable 
point  in  the  heel  of  this  modern  Achilles.  Re¬ 
duced  to  the  form  of  a  syllogism,  Mr.  George’s 
reasoning  is  as  follows  : 

1.  No  property  in  that  which  is  not  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  labor  is  right. 

2.  Land  is  not  the  production  of  labor.  There¬ 
fore, 

3.  No  property  in  land  is  right. 


i8 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


Follow  out  this  conclusion  to  its  legitimate 
result,  and  another  syllogism  suggests  itself : 

1.  No  one  can  be  robbed  of  that  which  is  not 
his  own  property  by  right. 

2.  Land  is  not  any  one’s  property  by  right. 

3.  No  one  can  be  robbed  of  land. 

From  this  reductio  ad  absurdum  it  is  plain  that 
there  is  an  erroneous  assumption  found  here.  If 
we  re-examine  the  premises  of  these  two  syllogisms, 
we  can  find  nothing  to  impeach  in  the  proposition 
“  land  is  not  the  production  of  labor.”  Nor  is  there 
any  thing  that  can  be  objected  to  in  the  statement 
.that  “  no  one  can  be  robbed  of  that  which  is  not  his 
own  property  by  right.”  The  other  premise  of  the 
second  syllogism  being  the  conclusion  of  the  first, 
and  the  minor  premise  of  the  first  (“  land  is  not 
the  production  of  labor”)  being  conceded,  the  flaw, 
if  there  is  any,  must  be  in  the  first  premise  of  the 
first  syllogism,  “  no  property  in  that  which  is 
not  the  production  of  labor  is  right ;  ”  or  otherwise 
stated,  “  property  in  that  which  is  not  the  pro¬ 
duction  of  labor  is  not  right.”  Let  us  examine  this 
proposition  more  closely. 

It  affirms  something  of  an  existing  institution. 
It  takes  up  the  subject  “  property  that  is  not  the, 
production  of  labor,”  and  predicates  of  this  subject 
that  it  is  not-right,  or  wrong.  Now  before  we  can 
safely  accept  this  affirmation,  we  must  examine  the 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGHT?  19 

two  things,  one  of  which  is  asserted  of  the  other. 
It  assumes  the  existence  of  property  that  is  not 
the  production  of  labor.  It  takes  things  as  they 
are,  not  as  they  ought  to  be.  Before  ascertaining 
whither  this  will  lead  us,  it  is  well  to  get  a  definite 
idea  of  property. 

In  general,  property  may  be  defined  as  that  which 
is  actually  owned,  whether  it  is  or  is  not  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  labor.  Before  we  can  affirm  that  it  is  right, 
we  should  also  clearly  settle  the  question  of  what 
right  is.  What  have  we  a  right  to  do  ?  What  is 
the  limit  of  the  self-assertion  of  the  individual? 
What  do  we  find  by  examining  the  conditions  of 
the  individual’s  existence  ?  What  are  we  warranted 
in  assuming  for  the  purposes  of  this  discussion  ? 
Evidently,  this  :  that  man  exists  on  this  earth  with 
certain  powers  and  capacities,  all  of  which  it  is  good 
to  assert,  so  long  as  their  assertion  by  one  man  does 
not  interfere  with  their  exercise  by  any  other  man. 
If  we  have  not  the  right  to  assert  and  exert  these 
powers  and  capacities  within  such  limits,  then  life 
is  a  mystery  which  it  were  hopeless  to  attempt  to 
solve.  But  to  make  the  notion  of  right  comprehen¬ 
sive  enough  to  command  universal  acquiescence, 
let  us  add  to  it  the  notion  of  self-protection  as  well 
as  self-assertion,  and  we  find  that 

1.  Every  thing  is  right  which  may  be  done  by  an 
individual  without  injury  to  himself  or  others. 


20 


TAX  THE  AREA 


Now  as  land  is  not  the  product  of  any  body’s 
labor,  and  as  nobody  is  necessarily  robbed  by  hold¬ 
ing  it,  we  consider  that 

2.  An  individual  may  hold  land  without  injury 
to  himself  or  others ;  and  therefore 

3.  Some  landholding  may  be  right.  It  is  exactly 
as  erroneous  to  infer  that  all  landholding  is  wrong 
because  some  land  is  wrongly  held,  as  it  would  be 
to  infer  that  one  man  may  own  all  the  land  in  the 
world  without  wronging  any  body,  from  the  fact  that 
he  may  own  ten  acres  without  wronging  any  body. 

As  keenly  as  Mr.  George  appreciates  the  right  of 
every  man  to  the  use  of  the  earth  for  the  sake  of 
the  means  of  subsistence,  he  forgets  that  it  includes 
the  right  of  every  man  to  every  form  of  use  to 
which  the  earth  can  be  put.  Man  has  a  right  to  all 
the  benefits  of  private  ownership  of  land,  and  this 
right,  like  the  right  to  the  means  of  earning  a  liv¬ 
ing,  is  universal.  The  evils  of  which  Mr.  George 
complains  are  the  outgrowth  of  the  abuse  of  the 
institution  of  private  property  in  land,  not  its  legiti¬ 
mate  use.  The  legitimate  use  of  this  institution 
would  be  its  extension  to  every  individual.  If 
every  person  owned  his  share  of  the  surface  of  the 
earth  in  fee  simple  —  a  farm  or  a  building  lot, 
according  to  the  occupation  which  he  chose  to 
follow  and  the  nature  of  it — the  causes  of  industrial 
depression  would  have  to  be  sought  elsewhere  than 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGHT?  21 


in  the  land  question.  Mr.  George  can  not  say  that 
the  causes  which  he  had  pointed  out — the  monopoly 
and  non-improvement  of  land  —  would  continue  to 
exist  if  the  ownership  of  land  were  made  universal. 
To  claim  that  it  is  impossible  to  distribute  land  so 
as  to  secure  to  every  one  his  right  to  the  opportu¬ 
nities  of  nature  is  to  assume  the  point  which,  of  all 
others,  it  devolves  on  Mr.  George  to  prove.  He 
does  not  really  undertake  to  prove  it.  On  the 
contrary,  after  an  elaborate  argument  designed  to 
prove  that,  since  man  did  not  make  land,  he  has  no 
right  of  property  in  it,  Mr.  George  substitutes  for 
the  notion  of  property  right  a  natural  and  unac¬ 
quired  right ;  the  right  that  exists  at  birth,  before 
the  individual  had  any  chance  to  earn  any  thing. 
In  order  to  enforce  this  right,  he  proposes  that 
individual  ownership  of  land  shall  continue  in  form 
but  be  abolished  in  substance,  by  taxing  —  what? 
Land  ?  No,  but  land  values.  No  one  can  success¬ 
fully  dispute  Mr.  George’s  position  that  our  right 
to  the  use  of  land  is  natural,  and  to  be  con¬ 
sistent  he  should  have  proposed  to  tax  land 
itself,  not  its  value.  To  tax  land  itself  may  be  to 
stimulate  the  usefulness  of  land  to  the  human 
race  ;  to  tax  its  value  is  to  tax  that  usefulness,  and 
to  handicap  it.  But  the  question  of  expediency  is 
important  enough  to  deserve  more  extended  dis¬ 
cussion  in  its  own  place.  To  return  to  the  question 


22 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


of  right,  let  us  analyze  the  right  of  private  property 
as  applied  by  existing  institutions.  What  does  it 
consist  of  ? 

1.  Of  the  right  (asserted  by  Mr.  George)  of  every 
man  to  the  use  of  the  earth  for  the  sake  of  the 
means  of  subsistence. 

2.  Of  the  right  (asserted  by  existing  institutions 
and  denied  by  Mr.  George)  of  the  individual  to  the 
value  of  the  land  appropriated  by  him. 

We  confidently  assert  this  second  right  as  general 
and  equitable  in  its  nature,  subject  only  to  such 
restrictions  as  the  nature  of  the  community  and  the 
demands  of  the  public  interest  may  impose.  We 
hope  to  show  hereafter  that  the  relation  of  land 
value  to  the  development  and  organic  form  of  the 
community  is  such  that  the  community  is  provided 
with  the  power  of  asserting  its  rights  without  taxing 
the  value  of  land,  and  that  every  legitimate  or  nec¬ 
essary  object  of  its  taxation  can  be  accomplished  by 
taxing  the  land  itself.  But  before  undertaking  to 
do  this  it  is  necessary  to  meet  Mr.  George’s  assertion 
that  the  community  is  entitled  to  the  value  of  land 
and  that  the  tenant’s  title  to  it  (except  when  its 
value  is  the  outgrowth  of  improvements  that  he  has 
made,  as  when  a  farmer  fertilizes  his  farm),  is  noth¬ 
ing  by  comparison. 

In  order  to  understand  the  right  of  the  individual 
to  that  portion  of  the  value  of  land  which  comes 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGHT  ?  23 

from  the  growth  of  the  community  around  it,  we 
must  avoid  the  error,  into  which  Mr.  George  seems 
to  have  fallen,  of  mistaking  the  effect  for  the  cause. 
Individual  enterprise  makes  a  community  grow 
before  the  growth  of  the  community  enriches  the 
individual.  There  is  not  a  single  incident  in  the 
growth  of  a  community  that  is  not  made  up  entirely 
of  individual  forces,  or  forces  which  one  or  more  indi¬ 
viduals  have  set  in  motion.  The  chance  that  all  the 
individuals  in  a  community  have  an  exactly  equal 
share  in  all  the  circumstances  which,  from  its  origin  to 
a  given  point  of  recent  time,  have  contributed  to  its 
growth,  is  but  one  in  many  thousands. 

Suppose  that  one  hundred  men  go  from  an  eastern 
city  to  a  western  territory  and  found  a  town.  Their 
individual  shrewdness,  averaged  by  consultation, 
selects  a  favorable  site. 

Suppose  that  fifty  of  these  men  build  houses  and 
the  other  fifty  live  in  these  houses  with  the  building 
fifty,  and  hold  their  own  lots  for  a  speculative 
advance.  We  are  already  beginning  to  differentiate 
the  interests  of  these  individuals  in  the  growth  of 
the  community.  It  is  already  unjust  to  tax  one  of 
the  building  fifty  to  the  full  value  of  his  lot  for  the 
benefit  of  one  of  the  speculating  fifty.  Yet  this  is 
what  Mr.  George  proposes  to  do.  A  public  tax  is 
supposed  to  be  for  the  benefit  of  all ;  like  the  rain, 
its  benefit  falls  on  the  unjust  as  well  as  the  just.  It 


24 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


therefore  follows  that  a  public  tax  should  not  be 
levied  beyond  the  absolute  need  of  the  community 
whether  it  is  levied  justly  or  unjustly  with  regard  to 
the  objects  of  taxation. 

Suppose,  again,  that  twenty-five  of  the  working, 
building  fifty  settlers  form  a  board  of  trade.  They 
secure  railroad  facilities  for  the  town.  They  invite 
factories  to  come  to  it.  They  organize  a  building 
association  ;  they  study  the  possibilities  of  improve¬ 
ment  ;  they  advertise  the  town  ;  they  induce  capital 
to  come  to  it  and  increase  its  value  as  a  whole. 
Thus  they  improve  the  value  of  every  piece  of  prop¬ 
erty  in  it.  Now  is  it  just  that  they  should  be  taxed 
for  the  benefit  of  the  seventy-five  others  who  have 
not  done  as  much  to  promote  this  total  value  as 
they  have  ? 

As  the  town  grows,  more  settlers  come  to  it.  Some 
of  them  own  real  estate  or  buy  it,  others  do  not. 
Some  are  thriving  and  industrious,  others  are  not. 
The  value  of  land  continues  to  improve ;  if  that 
value  is  taxed,  the  revenue  that  is  raised  for  the 
whole  community  is  increased,  and  its  benefits  are 
given  to  a  larger  number  of  the  drones  with  each 
increase  in  wealth  and  population.  The  most  valu¬ 
able  land,  and  the  land  that  would  be  taxed  most, 
would  be  on  the  principal  streets,  where  the  most 
enterprising  and  public-spirited  citizens  were  owners. 
The  next  most  valuable  would  be  on  the  next  streets. 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGHT?  25 

The  less  valuable,  still  further  out.  Any  circum¬ 
stances  calculated  to  affect  these  values  would  gen¬ 
erally  be  due  to  the  enterprise  of  individuals  or  asso¬ 
ciations  of  individuals,  acting  with  a  view  to  the 
purchase  of  some  benefit  for  themselves,  by  giving 
benefit  in  exchange  for  it.  If  A  owns  a  lot  in  the 
center  of  a  block,  and  B,  C,  D,  and  other  citizens 
make  that  lot  more  valuable  by  buying  and  improv¬ 
ing  adjoining  lots,  A  does  not  owe  this  increased 
value  to  the  community  in  general,  but  to  B,  C,  D, 
and  the  other  individuals  in  "particular.  They  do 
not  come  there  merely  for  the  sake  of  what  the  com¬ 
munity  affords  them  in  its  corporate  capacity,  but 
for  the  opportunity,  which  an  aggregation  of  individ¬ 
uals  affords  them,  of  selling  their  labor  or  investing 
their  capital.  A  is  one  of  these  individuals,  and  he 
receives  an  equivalent  for  what  he  gives.  One  can 
readily  imagine  that  a  lot  in  such  a  town,  valued  at 
$10,000,  and  surveyed  on  land  that  had  been  given 
to  the  settlers  outright  as  an  inducement,  might  have 
derived  almost  its  entire  value  from  a  succession  of 
events  which  were  brought  about  by  private  enter¬ 
prise  ; — whether  individual  or  organized,  it  matters 
not.  The  value  of  such  a  lot  might  be  analyzed  as 
follows  : 

Value  derived  from  the  extension  of  a  railroad  past  the 
town— one  group  of  private  citizens  building  the  rail¬ 
road  and  another  group  of  citizens  persuading  them  to 
locate  the  line  there,  giving  the  right  of  way,  etc.,  $  1,000 


26 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


Value  derived  from  the  location  of  a  station  in  the  town, 
through  the  co-operation  of  the  same  two  groups  of 
individuals.  .......  $2,000 

Value  derived  from  the  opening  of  streets  by  the  town 

council.  ........  2,000 

Value  derived  from  the  advertising  given  the  town  by 
newspapers  and  real  estate  agencies  (operated  by 
private  capital).  ......  2,o oo 

Value  derived  from  influx  of  new  population  (an  aggre¬ 
gation  of  individuals,  voluntarily  choosing  to  give 
whatever  benefit  their  presence  may  cause  to  the  town 
in  return  for  the  opportunity  of  making  a  living  which 
it  holds  out  to  them).  .....  3,00 o 

Total  10,000 

The  last  named  item  might  be  larger,  but  a  con¬ 
siderable  share  of  it  is  earned  by  the  individual 
efforts  included  in  the  preceding  item.  The  $2000 
of  value  derived  from  the  opening  of  streets  is, 
strictly  speaking,  the  only  part  of  the  total  value  of 
$10,000  that  has  not  been  earned  by  the  owner  of 
the  lot,  or  by  those  to  whom  he  has  given  something 
valuable  in  exchange.  Verily,  the  “  unearned  incre¬ 
ment/’  John  Stuart  Mill  to  the  contrary  notwith¬ 
standing,  is  chiefly  unearned  by  the  community, 
and  almost  entirely  earned  by  one  or  more  individ¬ 
uals,  whose  mutual  debt  is  settled  by  various  forms 
of  individual  reciprocity.  The  community  has  no 
more  right  to  confiscate  the  full  value  of  land  because 
it  is  acquired  in  this  way,  than  to  confiscate  the 
house  on  it  because  one  man  furnished  the  stone, 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OE  LAND  RIGHT ? 


-  i 


another  the  brick,  another  the  timber,  another  the 
plaster,  and  several  men  the  labor.  A  man  has  a 
right  to  make  an  expressed  or  implied  contract  with 
as  few  or  as  many  other  men  as  he  chooses,  and  the 
community  can  not  justly  extend  the  number  to 
include  all  of  its  members  and  to  give  them  an  equal 
share  in  the  benefits  of  one  side  of  that  contract, 
regardless  of  their  respective  responsibility  for  the 
benefits  received  on  the  other  side.  If  it  were  even 
remotely  possible  to  distribute  the  benefits  of  public 
revenue  so  as  to  return  most  to  those  who  have 
earned  most,  less  to  those  who  have  earned  less,  and 
so  forth,  there  might  be  a  prima  facie  case  made  out 
for  a  levy  of  revenue  beyond  the  necessities  of  the 
taxing  authority ;  but  these  ideal  conditions  are 
never  fulfilled.  Such  a  system  of  taxation  would 
benefit  Mr.  George’s  particular  bite  noire ,  the  land 
miser,  just  as  much  as  another  citizen.  The  man 
who  locks  up  unimproved  land  for  speculative  pur¬ 
poses,  the  keeper  of  the  saloon,  the  brothel,  and  the 
gambling  hell— all  are  members  of  the  community, 
and  all  derive  more  or  less  undeserved  benefit  from 
the  expenditure  of  revenue  for  public  purposes. 
In  short,  the  collection  of  public  revenue  can  not 
benefit  any  one  who  does  not  belong  to  one  of  the 
following  three  classes : 

i.  The  man  who  gets  more  benefit  therefrom  than 
he  deserves. 


28 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


2.  The  man  who  gets  exactly  as  much  benefit  as 

he  deserves. 

3.  The  man  who  is  benefited  less  than  he  deserves, 
if  at  all. 

The  third  man  is  robbed  for  the  benefit  of  the 
first,  as  truly  as  the  Irish  tenant  is  robbed  for  the 
benefit  of  the  landlord.  Both  of  these  men  are 
wronged  ;  for  the  man  who  receives  something  valu¬ 
able  which  he  has  not  earned,  save  as  the  gift  of 
ennobling  friendship  or  affection,  is  rendered  less 
dependent  on  his  own  exertions  and  less  useful  to 
society,  even  if  the  sudden  acquisition  of  additional 
wealth  does  not  sharpen  his  greed  and  make  him 
more  grasping. 

As  for  the  man  who  receives  from  taxation  just 
what  he  deserves — in  other  words,  just  what  he  has 
paid  in  in  the  shape  of  capital  or  labor — there  is  no 
reason  for  collecting  from  him  at  all,  beyond  the 
necessity  of  making  him  pay  his  share  for  the  ex¬ 
penses  of  ordinary  governmental  machinery.  It  is 
as  absurd  to  tax  him  and  to  return  the  tax  to  him  as 
it  would  be  for  Mr.  Henry  George  to  hand  Father 
McGlynn  a  dollar,  and  for  Father  McGlynn  to  hand 
it  directly  back  to  Mr.  George. 

We  imagine  we  hear  Mr.  George  asking  “Would 
you  then  make  the  amount  of  wealth  which  a  man 
had  accumulated  the  measure  of  his  deserts  at  the 
hands  of  the  community?  ” 


IS  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP  OF  LAND  RIGHT?  29 

By  no  means  ;  but  under  a  system  of  government 
which  gave  every  man  an  equal  opportunity,  that 
man’s  acquisitions  would,  at  any  given  point  of  future 
time,  represent  the  net  result  of  his  individual  exer¬ 
tions.  Mr.  George  has  taken  the  position  that  land  is 
opportunity  and  opportunity  island.  He  should  be 
willing  to  favor  a  system  of  land  regulation,  designed 
to  prevent  any  man  from  monopolizing  more  than 
his  share  of  land,  provided  it  can  be  shown  to  con¬ 
tain  the  elements  of  success. 

It  is  not  desirable  to  tax  the  deserving  individual 
unnecessarily  for  the  support  of  the  undeserving. 
There  are  legitimate  subjects  of  taxation,  including 
land,  which  obviate  the  necessity  of  so  doing,  and 
which  suffice  for  the  means  of  a  system  of  most  lib¬ 
eral  provision  for  teaching  the  undeserving  citizen 
to  deserve.  It  is  not  necessary  to  tax  all  land  values 
in  order  to  provide  for  an  ample  supply  of  industrial 
schools,  public  libraries,  museums,  and  other  benefi¬ 
cent  institutions,  the  mission  of  which  should  be 
to  protect  the  helpless  and  to  rescue  the  fallen,  as 
well  as  to  teach  the  healthy  and  respectable  young 
man  how  to  do  every  thing  for  himself,  instead  of 
asking  the  government  to  do  every  thing  for  him. 
Every  step  taken  in  the  direction  of  paternal  gov¬ 
ernment  should  be  taken  with  the  development  of 
the  individual  in  view,  and  no  such  steps  should  be 
taken  which  are  not  logically  consistent  with  the 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


30 

natural  laws  of  individual  development.  Self-culture 
and  a  vigorous,  manly  type  of  individual  are  not 
promoted  by  giving  the  individual  every  thing  with 
as  little  exertion  as  possible^on  his  part.  There  is  no 
such  thing  as  a  nation  of  minors,  and  self-respecting 
citizens  do  not  want  to  be  treated  as  minors.  They 
wish  nothing  more  than  the  regulation  of  the  oppor¬ 
tunities  to  which  they  have  equal  rights,  so  that 
those  opportunities  will  afford  the  greatest  possible 
encouragement  to  self-culture  and  individual  exer¬ 
tion,  and  so  that  the  excuse  of  the  loafer  and  idler 
that  “there  is  no  show  for  a  poor  man”  maybe 
taken  away. 

We  conclude,  then,  that  the  individual’s  title  to 
the  “  unearned  increment  ”  is  far  better  than  the  com¬ 
munity’s  ;  that  the  latter’s  right  to  tax  it  is  limited, 
because  its  share  in  promoting  the  growth  of  that 
increment  is  limited ;  that  this  right  can  become 
unlimited  only  by  the  community  totally  supersed¬ 
ing  the  individual  in  the  operation  of  all  the  factors 
of  such  growth, — in  other  words,  by  the  realization  of 

the  ideal  socialistic  state ;  and  finally  that  it  would  be 

*  » 

impossible  to  distribute  justly  the  benefits  of  such 
taxation. 


CHAPTER  III. 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL. 

“  This  undertaking  for  another  is  the  blunder  which  stands  in 
colossal  ugliness  in  the  governments  of  the  world.” — Emerson. 

THE  only  communities  of  which  we  know  any 
thing  are  composed  of  individuals.  That 
which  is  good  for  the  individual  under  the  laws  of 
his  being  must  necessarily  be  good  for  any  possible 
aggregation  of  individuals  existing  under  the  same 
laws,  no  matter  how  large  such  an  aggregation  may 
be.  Conversely,  nothing  that  tends  to  belittle  the 
individual,  or  to  reduce  the  sphere  of  his  conscious¬ 
ness,  or  to  prevent  the  exercise  of  any  one  of  his 
natural  faculties  for  his  own  physical,  mental,  or 
moral  benefit,  subject  to  such  restrictions  as  are 
needed  to  prevent  him  from  encroaching  upon  the 
similar  exercise  of  similar  rights  by  others,  can  be 
good  for  the  community  in  the  long  run.  The  indi¬ 
vidual  may  suffer  or  die  for  the  benefit  of  the  com¬ 
munity,  but  even  then  he  benefits  the  community 
only  by  benefiting  the  individuals  in  it.  If  he  is  a 
criminal  and  suffers  death  on  the  scaffold,  it  is  a 


32 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


warning  to  others  that  the  life  of  the  humblest  indi¬ 
vidual  must  be  respected,  and  that  punishment 
awaits  him  who  takes  it.  If  the  individual  who  suf¬ 
fers  is  a  patriot  soldier,  he  endures  the  privation  of 
military  service,  and  perhaps  gives  his  life,  for  the 
sentiment  of  patriotism  and  the  rights  of  other  indi¬ 
viduals  to  exercise  that  sentiment  or  to  enjoy  more 
material  forms  of  liberty.  If  he  survives,  the  self- 
sacrifice  which  he  has  endured  strengthens,  perhaps 
ennobles  his  own  character.  It  adds  to  his  own  indi¬ 
viduality,  and  enlarges  his  capacity  for  intellectual 
and  moral  life.  It  educates  him. 

What  is  an  army  but  an  aggregation  of  individ¬ 
uals?  What  is  a  war,  with  all  its  tremendous  and 
immeasurable  consequences,  its  stimulation  of 
patriotic  feeling,  and  its  indefinite  influence  on  the 
intellectual  and  moral  life  of  one  or  more  nations, 
but  the  joint  act  of  the  individuals  participating  in 
it  ?  What  great  reform,  such  as  the  abolition  of 
slavery,  was  ever  accomplished,  save  by  enlisting 
individuals,  one  by  one,  under  its  banner?  It  is 
absurd  to  undertake  to  accomplish  any  organic 
change  in  society  without  educating  individuals  to 
it.  Mr.  Henry  George  recognizes  this.  He  and  his 
fellow-orators  in  the  cause  of  land  nationalization  are 
continually  making  speeches  to  individuals,  and  send¬ 
ing  books  and  other  documents  for  individuals  to 
read.  They  all  recognize  that  no  effect  is  possible 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL .  33 

without  securing  individual  co-operation  as  a  second 
cause. 

But  apply  this  theory  of  individualism,  uncon¬ 
sciously  recognized  by  all,  to  the  less  undisputed 
theory  of  land  nationalization,  and  what  is  the  lesson 
that  forces  itself  upon  us?  This;  that  land  nation¬ 
alization  must  be  if  it  is  good  for  the  individual ; 
that  it  can  not  be  if  it  is  not  good  for  the  individual ; 
for  in  the  latter  event  it  can  not  by  any  possibility 
be  permanently  good  for  the  community. 

The  sense  of  private  ownership  in  general  increases 
the  sense  of  personal  dignity.  It  increases  one’s 
self-respect  most  if  that  which  is  owned  has  been 
honestly  acquired  by  the  labor  of  the  owner,  and  is 
held  in  constant  regard  of  the  right  of  others. 
There  is,  however,  something  especially  inspiring  in 
the  sense  of  ownership  of  land.  It  gives  a  man 
a  king-like  feeling.  It  awakens  his  pride  and  as  it 
has  never  been  awakened  before.  It  calls  into  exer¬ 
cise  various  other  faculties  that  have  been  dormant 
up  to  the  hour  when  the  consciousness  of  ownership 
begins. 

To  find  the  general  laws  governing  the  effect  of 
land  ownership  upon  the  individual  man,  the  notion 
must  be  qualified  as  little  as  possible.  The  area 
owned  is  variable,  and  is  not  a  constant  factor  at 
this  phase  of  the  problem.  The  notion  of  area  must 
therefore  be  excluded  for  the  present.  We  wish  to 


34 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


determine  the  general  effect  of  land  ownership  on  a 
man,  whether  he  owns  a  lot  a  few  feet  square  or  a 
county. 

It  is  the  universal  verdict  of  experience  that  the 
acquisition  of  land  in  one’s  own  name  increases  one’s 
sense  of  personal  importance,  and  leads  to  increased 
self-assertion.  Now  self-assertion  within  proper 
bounds — such  bounds  as  are  set  by  the  most  delicate 
perception  of  the  rights  of  others — is  the  secret  of 
individual  success  in  the  sphere  for  which  one  is 
adapted.  The  lack  of  it  is  the  most  familiar  expla¬ 
nation  of  a  man’s  failure  when  his  natural  capacities 
are  known  to  contain  the  other  elements  of  success. 
It  is  impossible  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  to 
make  every  citizen  a  land  owner  would  give  to  many 
who  had  not  received  it,  a  mighty  impulse  to  individ¬ 
uality.  It  would  awaken  millions  who  now  seem  to 
be  asleep  by  comparison  with  the  intellectual  and 
practical  activity  of  their  more  aggressive  fellow- 
men. 

If  legislation  can  be  so  shaped  as  to  bring  about 
a  well-nigh  universal  distribution  of  real  property, 
the  beneficial  effects  of  such  a  state  will  be  farther- 
reaching  and  more  varied  than  language  can  predict. 
To  be  an  owner  instead  of  a  tenant  would  mean,  to 
the  average  man  of  limited  means,  relief  from  a  tax 
probably  amounting  to  twenty-five  percent,  of  his 
income.  He  would  have  that  much  more  time 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL.  35 

available  either  for  more  careful  study  of  the  details 
of  his  business — likely  to  result  in  a  surer  grasp  of 
its  general  principles — or  for  the  cultivation  of  his 
intellectual,  aesthetic,  moral,  and  religious  faculties. 
His  value  as  a  citizen  and  a  voter  would  be  vastly 
increased.  The  man  who  owns  his  home  feels  a 
keener  interest  in  the  administration  of  public  affairs 
than  he  who  is  merely  a  tenant.  He  is  a  stock¬ 
holder  in  the  municipality ;  his  property  may  be 
depreciated  or  ruined  by  the  misconduct  of  public 
officials  if  he  does  not  watch  them  and  do  his  part  in 
holding  them  to  their  responsibility  to  the  people 
their  masters.  His  sympathies  will  generally  be 
enlisted  in  behalf  of  the  preservation  of  public  order 
when  it  is  riotously  assailed,  for  his  selfish  interest 
will  be  imperiled.  When  the  labor  riots  of  1877 
endangered  life  and  property  in  many  of  the  smaller 
industrial  centers  of  the  great  manufacturing  state 
of  Pennsylvania,  sometimes  sacrificing  both,  there 
was  no  appreciable  disorder  in  the  greatest  indus¬ 
trial  center  of  all,  the  city  of  Philadelphia ;  which 
freedom  from  trouble  was  almost  universally  attrib¬ 
uted,  then  and  since,  to  the  fact  that  has  given  that 
city  the  name  of  “  The  city  of  homes  ;  ”  the  fact 
that,  through  the  agency  of  an  army  of  building 
associations  the  percentage  of  house  owners  in  the 
population  of  Philadelphia  is  larger  than  in  any 
other  such  city  in  the  world. 


36 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


If  there  were  no  reason  for  agitating  the  land 
question  except  the  importance  of  promoting  indi¬ 
vidual  ownership  of  land  as  an  incentive  to  good 
citizenship,  this  motive  of  itself  would  justify  every 
legal  step  needed  to  make  every  man  a  house  owner. 
Universal  suffrage  is  an  accomplished  fact  in  this 
country,  and  there  is  no  step  backward  from  it ;  and 
it  is  slowly  but  certainly  coming  in  all  progressive 
nations.  Shall  the  balance  of  power  be  held  by 
orderly,  industrious  citizens  who  have  everything  to 
lose  and  nothing  to  gain  by  revolution  outside  of 
legal  methods,  or  by  the  Ishmaels  of  society,  who 
have  nothing  to  lose  and  every  thing  to  gain  by  un¬ 
settling  the  fabric  of  law  and  justice?  If  by  the 
former,  then  it  is  the  true  policy  to  destroy  the  lat¬ 
ter  as  a  famous  Eastern  Emperor  destroyed  his  ene¬ 
mies  when  he  made  friends  of  them.  Let  us  destroy 
the  Ishmaels,  as  Ishmaels.  Let  us  make  the  law 
their  friend,  and  so  make  them  friends  of  the  law. 
But  let  us  not,  in  seeking  to  do  this,  make  the  law 
their  deadliest  enemy  by  depriving  honest  labor  of 
its  favorite  reward,  in  order  to  accumulate  a  fund  to 
divide  among  those  who  have  not  earned  it,  and 
thus  removing  from  either  party  to  the  arrangement 
the  inducement  to  self-culture  and  independence  of 
character,  as  developed  by  industry.  Provided  the 
opportunities  are  properly  regulated  so  as  to  give 
every  man  a  chance  to  earn  a  living,  there  is  no  one 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL.  37 

who  will  not,  in  the  long  run,  respect  himself  more 
if  every  dollar  that  he  accumulates  is  the  result  of 
his  own  exertions,  than  he  would  if  he  were  entitled 
to  receive,  on  coming  of  age,  a  sum  of  money  from 
the  government  as  capital  on  which  to  make  his  start 
in  life.  The  honest,  manly  young  citizen  asks  no 
such  donation.  All  he  wants  is  a  fair  field  and  no 
favor,  and  he  will  make  his  own  way.  No  system 
of  legislation  ever  yet  devised  can  save  the  shiftless 
from  being  outstripped  in  the  race  for  wealth  by  the 
careful  and  industrious,  and  any  legislation  that 
would  do  so  would  be  grossly  unjust.  So  far  as  leg- 
islation  can  do  any  thing  to  reduce  the  number  of 
the  shiftless,  it  can  only  do  so  by  keeping  the  stand¬ 
ard  of  individualism  clearly  in  sight  ;  by  measures 
that  will  promote  it  and  increase  its  average.  A 
generation  of  parents  of  superior  intellectual  and 
moral  culture  will  be  likely  to  produce  a  generation 
of  children  in  advance  of  the  average  that  prevailed 
before  the  sphere  of  individual  and  moral  culture 
was  enlarged  by  increasing  the  opportunities  of  the 
multitude. 

We  regard  as  the  fatal  defect  of  Mr.  George’s 
proposition  to  tax  the  full  rental  value  of  land,  its 
deadly  demoralizing  effect  on  the  individual.  It  is 
bad  for  the  individual  both  in  the  collection  and  the 
disbursement  of  the  tax  proposed.  The  collection 
of  a  tax  to  the  full  rental  value  of  a  piece  of  land 


33 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


would  impair  the  sense  of  ownership,  which  we  have 
seen  to  be  of  the  utmost  value  to  the  individual. 
He  would  feel  all  the  time  that  the  State,  not  he, 
owned  it. 

When  the  tax  should  have  been  collected  in  any 
one  year,  and  disbursed  again  in  bounties  to  young 
men  coming  of  age,  every  one  of  these  young  men 
would  be  injured,  mentally  and  morally,  in  that  he 
was  under  no  necessity  of  working  for  and  earning 
his  bounty  before  he  received  it.  Another  genera¬ 
tion  of  individuals,  begotten  by  bountied  young 
men,  would  consist  of  moral  dwarfs  and  runts,  and 
a  full-grown  man — a  man  of  marked  individuality 
and  force  of  character — would  be  regarded  as  a  freak 
and  a  crank. 

We  have  so  far  considered  the  question  of  distri¬ 
bution  with  reference  to  its  direct  effect  on  the 
individual.  But  the  truths  of  individualism  claim 
not  only  to  be  of  the  highest  intellectual  and  moral 
value,  but  also  to  be  of  the  utmost  importance  to 
the  world’s  prosperity  in  a  material  sense. 

In  general,  science  teaches  that  an  organism  takes 
a  high  or  a  low  place  in  the  scale  of  natural  devel¬ 
opment  and  efficiency  of  control  over  inorganic  na¬ 
ture  for  its  own  purposes,  according  to  the  com¬ 
plexity  or  simplicity  of  its  various  organs,  and  the 
extent  to  which  their  respective  functions  are 
specialized  and  defined.  If  we  view  society  as  a 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL. 


39 


huge  organism  and  the  individuals  that  constitute 
it  as  its  organs,  it  will  follow  that  the  welfare  of 
society  will,  in  general,  be  promoted  by  institutions 
that  tend  to  produce  specialization  and  diversity 
of  function  among  individuals.  We  have  already 
seen  in  Chapter  II.  how  important  the  diversifica¬ 
tion  of  industries  is  to  the  problem  of  making  the 
soil  support  the  ultimate  population  of  the  earth. 
We  have  seen  that  the  stream  of  immigration  from 
the  country  to  the  city  must  be  maintained  to  insure 
that  reduction  of  the  average  area  required  per 
capita ,  which  is  needed  to  make  a  constant  surface 
support  an  increasing  population.  It  can  be  main¬ 
tained  only  by  the  country  sending  to  the  cities, 
towns  and  villages,  an  enormous  diversity  of  raw 
material,  to  be  worked  up  into  manufactured 
articles  and  turned  into  the  channels  of  commerce. 
It  is  a  question  whether  a  proper  diversification  of 
our  industries  would  not,  temporarily  at  least,  pre¬ 
vent  the  recurrence  of  those  periods  of  industrial 
depression  which  have  caused  a  revival  of  interest 
in  the  land  question.  This,  at  least,  is  reasonably 
certain  ;  that  the  productive  capacity  of  the  earth’s 
surface  would  be  enormously  increased  by  the  sub¬ 
division  of  arable  land  and  the  cultivation  of  each 
part  thereof  by  its  owner.  The  productive  capacity 
will  be  better  sustained  by  an  occupant  who  feels 
that  he  owns  it,  than  by  a  tenant  whose  tenure  is 


40 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


limited,  and  who  will  feel  no  sense  of  loss  if  he 
exhausts  the  fertility  of  the  soil  when  approaching 
the  expiration  of  his  lease.  If  a  tenant  does  not 
yield  to  this  temptation,  but,  on  the  contrary,  con¬ 
scientiously  improves  the  quality  of  the  ground 
which  he  cultivates,  there  is  nothing  to  insure  him 
against  an  increase  of  the  rent  which  he  has  to  pay 
for  the  use  of  it,  for  his  landlord  can  perhaps  get 
more  from  somebody  else,  and  may  decline  to  renew 
his  lease.  But  when  assured  of  a  life-long  tenure  of 
ownership,  unless  he  surrenders  it  of  his  own  free 
will,  he  is  likely  to  be  careful  not  to  exhaust  the 
soil :  rather  to  re-enforce  it  from  time  to  time  and  to 
realize  the  benefits  of  a  rotation  of  crops.  Experi¬ 
ence  will  enable  him  to  understand  what  the  local 
soil  most  needs.  It  is  equally  obvious  that  the  distri¬ 
bution  of  the  land  into  small  areas  can  not  fail  to 
secure  a  better  average  of  attention  to  cultivation, 
because  it  will  tend  to  make  every  man  concentrate 
his  resources.  Instead  of  a  large  tract  half  culti¬ 
vated  by  one  man,  there  will  be  two  or  more  small 
tracts,  well  cultivated,  each  by  its  owner.  The  fair¬ 
est  tests  of  the  policy  of  maximum  distribution 
show  that  in  general  it  promotes  the  prosperity  of 
the  individual.  Mr.  T.  Cliffe  Leslie,  in  his  Cobden 
Club  essay  on  “The  Land  System  of  France,’'  says 
that  the  system  of  small  property  is  daily  gain- 
ing  ground  in  France,  and  regards  the  fact  that  the 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL. 


41 


small  cultivating  landholder  is  a  continual  buyer  of 
land,  as  a  proof  that  it  is  profitable.  Ex-congressman 
William  A.  Phillips  of  Kansas,  in  his  interesting 
work  entitled,  “  Labor,  Land,  and  Law,”  finds  that 
in  France,  in  the  past  two-thirds  of  a  century  “the 
improvements  on  the  small  farms  are  much  greater 
than  they  would  be  if  the  land  was  held  by  renters. 
The  cultivators  are  not  only  able  to  buy  more  land 
whenever  an  opportunity  offers,  but  to  improve  the 
condition  of  what  they  have.  *  *  Arthur  Young 

predicted  that  such  small  divisions  would  make 
France  a  ‘  rabbit  warren.’  It  was  also  predicted 
that  as  there  would  be  no  wealthy  employers  the 
common  laborers  would  suffer  and  wages  decline. 
The  contrary  is  the  fact.  The  small  farm  culture  in 
France  has  increased  wages,  partly  owing  to  better 
production  and  partly  to  the  fact  that  the  labor¬ 
ers  have  continually  been  changing  to  small  holders. 
Mr.  Leslie  on  this  subject  says  that  seventy-five  per 
cent,  of  those  who  were  mere  laborers  when  this 
system  began,  have  become  owners  of  land.  It  was 
also  said  by  the  political  economists  that  these  small 
farmers  would  be  burdened  with  debt,  so  as  to  crip¬ 
ple  them.  M.  Lavergne  estimates  the  debt  on  the 
small  properties  in  France  to  be  only  five  per  cent, 
of  their  value.  *  *  The  buyers  are  almost  ex¬ 
clusively  occupants.  *  *  A  large  amount  of  the 

national  debt  of  France  is  held  by  these  peasant 


42 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


landholders.  This  was  one  thing  that  enabled  France 
to  meet  her  great  war  indemnity  to  Germany.”  The 
cheapness  of  the  necessaries  of  life  in  France,  and 
the  enormous  value  of  her  agricultural  exports  as 
well  as  the  exports  of  manufactured  products,  speak 
volumes  when  compared  with  the  results  of  aristo¬ 
cratic  landlordism  and  tenantry  in  Ireland,  En¬ 
gland,  Austria  and  Spain. 

If  a  community  consists  of  prosperous  individuals, 
that  it  will  be  a  prosperous  community  goes  without 
saying.  If  it  is  filled  with  contented  individuals, 
that  mysterious,  impalpable  thing  called  business 
confidence  will  be  likely  to  prevail.  If  the  popula¬ 
tion  is  increasing  in  the  natural  course  of  events 
there  will  be  competition  and  aggressive  enterprise 
where  there  is  confidence. 

The  relations  of  capital  and  labor  will  be  mere 
friendly  and  rational  whenever  the  bulk  of  the  wage 
workers  own  their  houses.  The  home-owner  is  not 
quick  to  make  to  himself  enemies  in  the  community 
in  which  he  lives  by  unnecessary  participation  in 
strikes,  boycotts  or  any  other  form  of  organized 
action  that  is  easily  abused.  From  the  nature  of  his 
circumstances,  he  is  an  advocate  of  arbitration,  and 
he  is  willing  to  abide  by  it  when  it  does  not  result  in 
his  favor,  because  he  can  afford  to  wait  and  to 
depend  on  the  good-will  of  public  opinion,  which 
attaches  itself  to  a  citizen  whose  respectability  has 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL . 


43 


stood  the  test  of  time.  It  is  not  easy  to  exaggerate 
the  value  of  universal  home  ownership  as  a  preven¬ 
tive  of  the  industrial  disturbances  that  so  often 
arrest  prosperity,  and  that,  happily  with  greater 
rarity,  endanger  public  order  and  the  happiness  of 
those  not  responsible  for  the  evil  that  is  at  the  root 
of  the  disturbance. 

We  have  seen  that  perfect  distribution  would 
benefit  the  individual  apart  from  the  material  or  pro¬ 
ductive  value  of  the  land,  and  that  the  development 
of  the  individual,  by  this  means,  would  be  followed 
by  increased  attention  to  the  productive  powers  of 
the  soil,  increased  development  of  those  powers,  and 
consequently  increased  production.  In  other  words, 
it  would  improve  the  individual  to  own  land,  and  it 
would  improve  the  land  to  be  owned  by  as  many 
individuals  as  possible.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
wholesale  suppression  of  the  individual  by  a  perpetu¬ 
ally  obtrusive  system  of  public  ownership  would  not 
only  retard  human  intellectual  and  moral  develop¬ 
ment,  but  would  arrest  the  growth  of  productive 
forces.  The  world  is  coming  to  see  that  the  home- 
rule  principle,  the  principle  of  individual  liberty,  is 
the  most  expedient  as  well  as  the  most  just  of  the 
canons  of  government.  To  secure  the  best  results, 
every  individual  must  be  an  assistant  governor. 
Every  individual  must  enforce  proper  rules  of  con¬ 
duct  within  his  own  sphere,  and  this  enforcement 


44 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


will  be  most  perfect  when  every  individual  enforces 
as  much  as  possible  of  the  law  that  he  makes,  and 
makes  as  much  as  possible  of  that  which  he  enforces. 
The  ultimate  solution  must  be  the  education  of  the 
individual,  and  the  bringing  of  every  public  function 
as  near  to  him,  by  thoroughly  distributing  the  centers 
of  administration  and  responsibility,  as  possible. 
Only  thus  can  responsibility  be  clearly  defined  and 
enforced  without  the  confusion  of  issues.  The  ap¬ 
plication  of  this  general  truth  to  the  land  question 
teaches  that  the  perfect  distribution  of  land  will 
bring  about  its  perfect  development,  and  the  perfect 
administration  of  those  laws  of  nature  which  regu¬ 
late  its  use  for  the  maintenance  of  mankind. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION. 

“  Democratize  property,  not  by  abolishing  but  by  universal¬ 
izing  it,  so  that  every  citizen  without  exception  may  be  a  land¬ 
holder — a?i  easier  task  than  it  may  be  supposed — in  two  words, 
know  how  to  produce  wealth  and  to  distribute  it,  and  you  will 
possess  at  once  material  greatness  and  moral  greatness.” — 
Victor  Hugo. 

ERFECT  distribution  implies  rigid  regulation 


X  of  land  ownership.  Land  must  not  only  be 
distributed  once,  but  it  must  stay  distributed  ;  the 
distributing  force  must  be  permanently  resident  in 
the  law  itself,  not  applied  in  the  form  of  overt  acts 
at  irregular  intervals.  The  land  should,  in  fact,  be 
made  to  seem  to  distribute  itself  spontaneously.  It 
would  be  bad  statesmanship  to  distribute  it  forcibly. 
There  are  numerous  objections  to  wholesale  confis¬ 
cation  and  redistribution.  An  enormous  increase 
in  governmental  machinery  would  be  needed,  and 
every  student  of  civil  service  questions  knows  how 
hard  it  is  to  keep  offices  created  for  temporary 
purposes  from  becoming  permanent  barnacles. 

In  economics,  as  in  physical  science,  the  best 
progress  is  made  by  following  the  line  of  least  re- 


46 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


sistance  or  friction.  An  immense  reserve  of  money 
would  be  required  to  enable  the  government  of  a 
state  or  a  county  to  buy  every  body’s  land  in  order 
to  resell  it ;  the  awarding  of  fair  compensation 
would  be  a  herculean  job  in  more  senses  than  one, 
and  more  or  less  corruption  would  result  long  before 
the  government  had  gotten  possession  of  all  the 
land.  When  the  actual  work  of  redistribution 
began,  there  would  be  a  serious  dilemma.  If  a 
government  were  able  to  give  away  the  land  in  its 
jurisdiction,  the  next  generation  would  think  it 
unfair  that  the  sons  had  to  buy  land  which  was 
given  to  the  fathers,  for  accumulation  and  unequal 
distribution  would  go  on  as  before  if  the  ordinary 
laws  of  land  tenure  continued  in  force.  The  sons  of 
accumulating  fathers  would  inherit,  and  the  sons  of 
other  fathers  would  have  to  buy.  What  would  be 
more  natural  than  that  another  process  of  wholesale 
purchase  and  redonation  would  be  demanded,  and 
how  hard  would  it  be  to  resist  it !  Such  a  method 
of  redistribution  is  plainly  inadequate.  It  would 
discourage  the  spirit  of  improvement  that  is  born  of 
the  sense  of  permanent  tenure  and  would  involve 
the  increase  of  governmental  machinery  at  frequent 
intervals.  It  is  open,  although  in  a  less  degree,  to 
the  objections  that  lie  against  actual  state  owner¬ 
ship  and  universal  tenantship. 

It  would  be  far  wiser  to  put  distributing  forces  in 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  47 

operation  in  the  ordinary,  rather  than  in  extraor¬ 
dinary  regulations  of  land  tenure;  to  adjust  the  land 
laws  so  that  the  unwritten  law  of  supply  and  demand 
could  have  a  chance  to  operate  instead  of  being 
blocked  more  and  more  as  a  community  increases 
in  material  progress ;  to  make  use  of  existing 
institutions  with  which  the  public  is  familiar,  and 
which  it  takes  as  matters  of  course,  and  to  apply 
legal  machinery  only  under  circumstances  which 
suggest  its  use,  instead  of  introducing  it  arbi¬ 
trarily. 

Just  such  circumstances  are  found  in  the  institu¬ 
tion  of  taxation,  and  in  the  temporary  assumption 
of  qualified  governmental  control  on  the  death  of  a 

person  leaving  an  estate.  If  the  opportunities 

* 

offered  by  these  familiar  facts  suffice  for  making 
effective  such  measures  as  are  intended  to  promote 
the  utmost  necessary  distribution  of  land,  their 
effectiveness  will  be  impaired  rather  than  increased 
by  going  further  and  arousing  needless  opposition. 

We  infer,  then,  that  the  desideratum  is  a  method 
of  taxation  that  zvill  make  land  distribute  itself  in 
response  to  the  continually  increasing  demand  there¬ 
for ;  supplemented  with  such  legislation  regarding 
the  settlement  of  estates  as  will  aid  in  this  process 
of  distribution.  It  should  be  made  unlawful  for  an 
heir  to  inherit  more  than  a  certain  area  of  land  in 
any  county  in  which  he  does  not  actually  reside,  the 


48 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


excess  to  be  sold  by  the  sheriff,  and  the  proceeds, 
less  costs,  turned  into  the  estate  in  cash.  Such  a 
provision  would  induce  many  men  to  settle  their 
own  estates  by  selling  off  land  as  they  had 
opportunity  and  investing  the  money  otherwise. 
Indeed,  rich  men  would  be  less  disposed  to  accumu¬ 
late  real  estate,  and  thus  the  monopoly  demand  for 
land  would  be  reduced,  and  improvement  promoted 
by  the  capital  thus  directed  into  channels  of  greater 
activity. 

So  much  for  occasions  of  extraordinary  govern¬ 
mental  interference.  The  ordinary  occasion — that 
of  taxation — demands  a  more  extended  discussion. 

The  object  of  taxation  is,  primarily,  the  accumu¬ 
lation  of  the  money  needed  to  pay  the  necessary 
cost  of  government.  Taxation  of  some  kind  is  a 
necessity,  if  there  is  to  be  any  government ;  and  this 
institution,  therefore,  offers  one  of  the  easiest  meth¬ 
ods  of  accomplishing  a  given  legitimate  purpose, 
when  it  is  desirable  to  work  by  indirect  methods, 
rather  than  to  provoke  resistance  by  direct  interfer¬ 
ence  of  a  more  or  less  arbitrary  aspect.  Laws  which 
compel  the  citizen  to  do  his  share  in  a  great  altruis¬ 
tic  scheme  for  giving  his  neighbor  an  equal  oppor¬ 
tunity  to  that  which  he  enjoys  are  more  readily 
acquiesced  in  if  their  operation  is  indirect  enough 
not  to  be  felt.  The  abuse  of  indirect  taxation  is  no 
argument  against  its  legitimate  use,  and  the  spirit 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAX  A  TION.  49 

of  individualism  is  promoted  by  reminding  the  indi¬ 
vidual  as  seldom  as  possible  that  he  is  governed. 
There  is,  therefore,  a  legitimate  secondary  use  of 
taxation  as  a  means  to  a  worthy  end.  Wisely 
applied  taxation  can  be  used  for  the  assertion  of 
that  individualism  which  is  as  important  to  the 
nation,  or  the  social  unit,  as  a  factor  in  human  prog¬ 
ress,  as  it  is  to  the  personal  unit. 

Land  taxation  in  particular,  for  ulterior  purposes, 
should  commend  itself  even  to  the  extreme  members 
of  the  laissez  faire  school,  on  account  of  the  fact,  which 
can  not  be  ignored  for  a  moment  in  any  fair  discus¬ 
sion  of  the  land  question,  that  land  is  constant  while 
the  population  that  must  live  on  it  tends  to  increase 
continually.  If  it  were  susceptible  of  proof  that 
taxation  should  not  be  ordinarily  employed  for  any 
other  purpose  whatsoever  than  the  raising  of 
revenue,  it  would  still  be  legitimate  to  apply  it  to 
the  land  in  such  a  way  as  to  break  up  monopoly. 
For  no  other  object  of  taxation,  from  its  very  nature 
and  conditions ,  is  so  admirably  adapted  for  the 
restriction  of  taxation  to  “  the  actual  needs  of  the 
government ,  honestly  administered ,”  as  one  which  is 
constant  in  quantity  while  the  community  that  taxes 
it  is  growing  continually .  Nothing  is  so  necessary 
to  our  existence  as  land,  and  no  other  object  of  tax¬ 
ation  transmits  the  sense  of  being  taxed  to  so  many 
persons..  Every  body  feels  realty  taxes.  The  land- 


5° 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


lord  feels  them,  and  he  takes  good  care  to  take  them 
out  of  the  tenant  as  far  as  possible. 

But  even  the  rigid  regulation  of  land  tenure  should 
be  kept  within  the  limits  indicated  by  Mr.  Herbert 
Spencer’s  theory  that  the  true  function  of  govern¬ 
ment  is  negatively-regulative ;  that  the  govern¬ 
ment,  instead  of  doing  every  thing  for  the  individual, 
should  simply  insure  him  the  opportunity  to  do 
every  thing  for  himself.  Mr.  Spencer’s  principle 
will  be  found  amply  sufficient.  All  that  is  needed 
is  that  the  government  should  tear  down  the  artifi¬ 
cial  and  irrational  barriers  to  improvement  and  dis¬ 
tribution,  and  adopt  a  rational  and  obvious  system 
of  taxation,  and  land  will  not  only  distribute  itself, 
but  will  stay  distributed. 

In  order  to  be  permanently  useful,  land  taxation 
should  meet  these  two  demands : 

(1)  It  should  promote,  rather  than  retard,  distri¬ 
bution. 

(2)  It  should  promote,  rather  than  retard, 
improvement. 

To  these  requisites  must  be  added  a  third,  which 
applies  to  all  taxation  whatsoever: 

(3)  It  should  be  impartial  in  its  operation. 

Adhering"  as  closely  as  possible  to  the  principle 

that  existing  institutions,  particular  as  well  as  gen¬ 
eral,  are  to  be  utilized  as  the  surest  channels  to 
immediate  and  permanent  progress,  it  is  important 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  5 1 

to  inquire  how  far  the  present  method  of  land  tax¬ 
ation  complies  with  the  above  requirements.  The 
present  method  embodies  the  principle  known  in 
custom-houses  as  that  of  ad  valorem  taxation. 

First,  does  ad  valorem  taxation  of  land  promote 
distribution  ? 

A  tax  will  operate  in  favor  of  customs  and  devices 
by  which  it  can  be  evaded.  This  is  human  nature 
and  is  not  altogether  wrong.  A  tax  is,  in  general, 
the  confiscation  of  a  portion  of  man’s  income,  pre¬ 
sumably  the  result  of  his  labor,  and  which  he  has 
earned  the  right  to  dispose  of.  Now  it  is  a  familiar 
fact  that  a  farm  of  500  acres  is  liable  to  be  assessed 
at  less  than  five  times  the  valuation  placed  by 
assessors  upon  a  similarly  located  farm  of  100  acres. 
Our  present  system  of  taxation — indeed  our  whole 
system  of  land  traffic — deals  with  land  as  if  it  were 
a  commodity  that  could  be  reproduced  indefinitely, 
and  of  which  the  production  could  be  encouraged 
by  making  the  wholesale  price  per  acre  smaller  than 
the  retail.  There  is  reason  in  the  difference  between 
the  wholesale  and  retail  prices  of  articles  which  can 
be  replaced  when  consumed.  The  process  of 
replacing  them  gives  employment  to  labor,  and  the 
money  spent  for  labor  and  material  goes  into  circu¬ 
lation  all  the  sooner  for  the  necessity  of  replacing 
them.  But  when  land  is  taken  out  of  the  market 
you  can  not  employ  labor  to  make  more  land.  It  is 


52 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


not  so  reasonable,  then,  to  discriminate  in  favor  of 
the  man  who  has  a  large  tract  of  land,  and  to  make 
his  taxes  lighter  to  the  acre  than  those  of  a  small 
holder  are  likely  to  be.  Yet  there  is  a  continual 
temptation  to  this.  It  is  not  so  easy  for  the  asses¬ 
sor  to  explore  a  large  holding  as  it  is  to  examine  a 
small  one,  so  he  looks  at  the  buildings,  takes  the 
average  value  of  the  land  for  granted,  and  naturally 
gives  the  owner,  rather  than  the  community,  the 
benefit  of  whatever  doubt  there  is. 

Let  us  assume  that  there  are  half  a  dozen  proper¬ 
ties,  of  the  respective  areas  of  ten,  twenty,  forty, 
eighty,  one  hundred  and  sixty  and  three  hundred 
and  twenty  acres,  and  that  the  artificial  improve¬ 
ments  are  of  equal  value  throughout,  consisting, 
say,  of  houses  worth  $5,000  upon  each  property. 
Let  us  suppose  that  the  land,  without  the  houses,  is 
worth  $100  per  acre.  The  following  table  shows 
the  total  value  of  each  property  : 


Acres 

10 

20 

40 

80 

160 

Value 

$6,000 

7,000 

9,000 

13,000 

21,000 

It  is  evident  from  this  table  that  the  taxation  of 
real  property  on  the  ad  valorem  plan  is  less  burden¬ 
some  per  acre  as  the  area  of  a  holding  increases.  If 
we  exempt  artificial  improvements  and  attempt,  like 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  53 

Henry  George,  to  tax  the  land  itself,  the  ad  valorem 
tax  puts  a  premium  on  monopoly  and  discourages 
small  holdings  for  homestead  purposes.  It  is  not 
to  be  wondered  at  that  Mr.  George  suspects  the 
existence  of  conditions  which  make  the  rich  richer 
and  the  poor  poorer.  The  only  thing  to  be  won¬ 
dered  at  is  that  he  fails  to  see  that  it  is  the  taxation 
of  that  element  of  value  which  the  individual  creates, 
the  improvements  both  in  the  soil  and  on  it,  that 
tends  to  keep  poverty  abreast  of  progress.  But, 
just  as  a  man  on  a  giant’s  shoulders  can  see  farther 
than  the  giant  can,  we  can  see  that  his  principle  that 
taxation  should  not  handicap  improvement  extends 
farther  than  he  thinks,  and  that  it  applies  to  land  as 
well  as  to  houses.  The  logical  result  of  its  exten¬ 
sion  to  land  is  the  principle  of  specific  taxation  ;  the 
taxation  of  land,  not  production  or  the  producer. 

The  above  table  shows  again  that  the  ad  valorem 
method  of  taxation  discriminates  in  favor  of  the  land 
miser,  who  locks  up  large  areas  for  speculative  pur¬ 
poses  and  keeps  them  idle  and  unproductive,  while 
it  bears  hardest  on  the  small  holder  who  perhaps 
cultivates  every  square  foot  of  his  little  lot  not 
required  for  his  houses  and  pathways.  The  lot 
holder  who  improves  his  property  is  punished,  as  if 
for  doing  wrong  to  the  community,  when  he  in¬ 
creases  its  supply  of  building  accommodation  and 
does  his  share  to  keep  rents  down.  The  farmer  is 


54 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


punished  by  increased  taxation  if  he  increases  the 
value  of  his  farm  by  making  it  more  productive, 
increasing  the  supply  of  food  and  keeping  down  the 
price  of  the  necessaries  of  life.  The  land  miser  is 
much  worse  than  the  currency  miser,  for  there  is 
more  currency  where  the  latter  miser’s  commodity 
came  from.  But  he  who  locks  up  land  against 
improvement  reduces  the  actual  supply.  Thus  he 
wrongs  the  present  generation.  He  prevents  the 
improvement  needed  to  enable  the  soil  to  support 
an  increasing  population  in  future.  Thus  he  wrongs 
future  generations.  He  should  be  taxed  out  of 
existence. 

It  would  seem,  then,  that  so  far  as  the  ad  valorem 
taxation  of  land  affects  its  distribution  at  all,  it  tends 
to  retard  it.  It  certainly  does  not  promote  it,  but 
rather  encourages  the  accumulation  of  idle  land  for 
speculative  purposes.  But  it  is  impossible  to  weigh 
the  real  merits  of  the  value  method  of  taxation  of 
land  without  considering  the  effects  of  improve¬ 
ment,  which,  under  normal  conditions,  is  responsible 
for  whatever  differences  in  value  may  exist.  We 
therefore  pass  on  to  the  second  question  and  call 
attention  to  it  as  of  the  utmost  importance. 

Does  value  taxation  promote  improvement  or 
retard  it  ? 

We  are  confronted  at  the  outset  by  the  obvious 
fact  that  improvement,  from  the  very  nature  of  the 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  55 

case,  increases  value,  and  therefore  creates  a  liability 
to  increased  taxation.  It  now  becomes  clearer  why 
the  farm  of  ioo  acres  bears  more  than  one-fifth  of 
the  burden  imposed  on  the  farm  of  500  acres.  It  is 
because  all  kinds  of  improvements  are  taxed.  One 
is  tempted  to  wonder  how  such  an  absurd  basis  of 
taxation  could  ever  have  been  adopted  until  we 
remember  that  every  such  system  is  a  gradual 
growth  from  inadequate  beginnings.  To  deny  that 
an  ad  valorem  tax  is  a  tax  on  improvement  is  as 
useless  as  it  would  be  to  deny  that  two  and  two 
are  four.  So  plain  a  truth  can  not  be  denied,  and 
does  not  need  to  be  asserted.  It  asserts  itself,  and 
its  absurdity  also  asserts  itself,  when  it  is  seen  from 
any  point  of  view  except  that  from  which  we  are 
compelled  to  recognize  the  improvement  tax  as  an 
existing  institution. 

Henry  George,  in  “  Progress  and  Poverty/’  points 
out  this  absurdity,  and  proceeds  to  demand  the 
abolition  of  the  lesser  part  of  it  in  importance,  the 
tax  on  buildings.  Mr.  George  would  concentrate 
all  taxation  on  land  itself ;  and  so  far  he  seems  to  us 
to  be  right.  All  taxation  on  real  estate  should  be 
put  on  the  land  itself.  A  town  that  wishes  to 
induce  a  factory  to  locate  within  its  limits  exempts 
it  from  taxation  for  a  term  of  years,  and  the  fac¬ 
tory  comes.  This  species  of  exemption  should 
become  perpetual  and  universal,  if  possible.  A 


56 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


man  should  not  be  fined  for  building  a  handsome 
house,  by  being  compelled  to  pay  a  big  tax  on  it, 
while  his  next  door  neighbor,  occupying  a  lot  of 
perhaps  the  same  size,  with  a  squatty,  ugly  little 
house  that  is  an  eyesore  to  the  neighborhood,  is 
taxed  lightly. 

But  carry  out  to  its  logical  conclusion  the  excel¬ 
lent  point  made  by  Mr.  George,  that  a  tax  on  im¬ 
provements  is  a  tax  on  improvement — any  of  us  can 
make  this  egg  stand  on  its  end  after  Columbus  has 
done  it — and  what  are  we  compelled  to  infer? 

The  ad  valorem  tax  is  a  tax  on  the  improvement , 
and  a  hindrance  to  the  productive  capacity,  of  the  land 
itself. 

Fertilize  a  farm  and  increase  the  average  yield  to 
the  acre,  and  its  value  is  increased,  even  if  you  have 
made  no  additions  to  the  buildings  since  the  last  val¬ 
uation  was  made.  If  valuation  were  only  a  question 
of  buildings — important  as  it  is  to  repeal  the  tax 
on  building  improvements — the  land  question  would 
not  to-day  be  a  topic  of  widespread  discussion  in¬ 
volving  the  rights  of  man  and  the  future  subsistence 
of  the  race.  Land  without  buildings  would  be  easy 
to  get.  But  there  is  improved  land  in  the  suburbs 
of  every  town  or  city  which  it  is  next  to  impossible 
to  get  without  paying  an  exorbitant  price.  Henry 
George  wants  to  tax  the  so-called  “  unearned  incre¬ 
ment,”  the  increase  in  value  resulting  from  the 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  57 

growth,  of  the  community  close  by.  But  the  ad 
valorem  tax  taxes  the  earned  increment.  The 
farmer  who  takes  up  some  wild  land,  clears  it,  fertil¬ 
izes  it,  and  makes  it  worth  something,  is  taxed  or 
fined  for  doing  so.  In  one  respect,  at  least,  we  have 
already  carried  out  the  socialist  doctrine.  The 
farmer  is  only  a  tenant,  the  government  is  his  land¬ 
lord  :  the  tax  is  his  rent,  and  when  the  tenant  makes 
improvements  the  landlord  raises  the  rent. 

The  third  test  to  be  applied  to  the  value  taxation 
method  is  the  question  whether  it  is  impartial. 

We  have  already  seen  that  it  is  not,  in  that  it  pun¬ 
ishes  the  enterprising  citizen  who  makes  handsome 
improvements,  and  puts  a  premium  on  non-improve¬ 
ment,  which  encourages  that  contemptible  being, 
the  land  miser.  This  is  unjust.  But  it  is  also  un¬ 
just  through  the  imperfect  distribution  which  it 
makes  continually  more  imperfect.  It  is  continu¬ 
ally  growing  harder  to  get  land  under  this  locking- 
up-system.  The  result  is  that  the  tenants  increase 
faster  than  the  landlords,  and  the  latter,  being  mas¬ 
ters  of  the  situation,  impose  the  taxes  on  the  former, 
by  increasing  the  rent.  The  system  is  hardest  of 
all  on  the  tenant  of  the  small  house.  Houses  of 
four  rooms  pay  ten  and  twelve  per  cent,  on  the 
investment  because  the  workingman  is  obliged  to  be 
a  tenant,  since  he  finds  it  so  hard  to  own  a  home¬ 
stead.  Perfect  distribution  would  go  far  to  remedy 


TAX  THE  AREA, 


5* 

this.  The  workingman  would  find  it  easier  to  own 
his  house  if  he  chose  to  do  so,  and  the  proportion  of 
tenants  to  owners  would  fall  off.  The  taxes  would 
equalize  themselves  with  improved  distribution, 
while  the  ad  valorem  method  of  taxation,  with  its 
adverse  effect  on  distribution— partly  a  direct  effect 
and  partly  indirect,  through  its  adverse  effect  on 
improvement,  with  which  distribution  is  so  closely 
associated— imposes  the  burdens  of  taxation  more 
unequally  as  civilization  progresses. 

To  recapitulate,  we  have,  been  led  to  the  conclu¬ 
sion  that  the  evils  arising  from  the  imperfect  distri¬ 
bution  of  land  can  be  remedied  by  reforms  calcu¬ 
lated  to  promote  individualism ;  that  the  most  per¬ 
fect  distribution  of  land  would  be  that  which  made 
it  as  easy  as  possible  for  every  individual  to  acquire 
land  ;  that  such  a  reform  should  be  accomplished 
by  ordinary  and  accepted,  rather  than  extraordinary 
and  radical  methods  of  administration  ;  that  taxation 
and  the  regulation  of  decedents'  estates  are  the 
channels  through  which  the  desired  end  can  be 
attained  with  the  least  resistance  ;  and  finally,  that 
the  ad  valorem  method  of  taxation  is  a  hindrance  to 
distribution  and  improvement,  and  tends  to  promote 
the  evils  of  landlordism,  and  the  idleness  of  the  soil 
for  the  speculative  purposes  of  its  owners.  We  find 
that  the  taxation  of  improvements  whether  in  build¬ 
ings  or  in  the  quality  of  the  soil,  is  inseparable  from 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION .  59 

the  taxation  of  real  property  on  a  basis  of  mere 
value,  and  that  all  such  taxation  tends  to  discourage 
the  spirit  of  enterprise  which  should  be  exerted 
upon  the  soil  to  make  it  meet  the  increasing  de¬ 
mands  that  will  be  made  upon  it  in  the  future,  with 
the  growth  of  population. 

Taxation  of  every  kind  is  included  in  one  or  the 
other  of  two  classes :  ad  valorem  taxes  and  specific 
taxes.  These  two  expressions  are  chiefly  used  with 
reference  to  import  duties,  the  ad  valorem  duty  on 
wool  for  instance,  having  been  at  one  time  five  per 
cent.,  and  the  specific  duty  subsequently  twelve 
cents  a  pound. 

We  propose  that  specific  taxation  be  substituted  for 
the  ad  valorem  taxation  of  land,  by  applying  to  each 
unit  of  measurement  (an  acre,  or  a  square  foot)  a  tax 
rate  of  a  definite  sum  of  money , 

It  should  be  understood  at  once  that  a  specific 
tax  on  land,  which  must  of  necessity  be  a  tax  ac¬ 
cording  to  area  or  linear  measurement,  does  not 
mean  the  same  tax  rate  on  one  acre  as  on  another 
acre  differently  situated,  any  more  than  to  make  all 
tariff  duties  specific  would  mean  the  same  duty 
on  a  pound  of  wool  as  on  a  pound  of  sugar,  or 
the  measurement  of  every  imported  article  by 
the  pound  instead  of  by  some  other  unit  of 
measurement  more  appropriate  to  the  circum¬ 
stances  of  the  case,  It  would  be  just  as  easy 


6o 


TAX  THIS.  AREA. 


to  classify  land  as  any  other  series  of  taxable 

« 

articles. 

There  can  be  no  perfect  substitute  for  the  ad 
valorem  method  of  taxing  land,  which  is  not  free 
from  the  objections  which  we  have  found  to  lie 
against  this  method.  In  other  words  the  area  tax 
plan,  or  any  other  plan  which  is  intended  to  replace 
the  value  tax  plan,  must  comply  with  these  require¬ 
ments  : 

1.  It  must  promote  the  distribution  of  land. 

2.  It  must  promote  the  improvement  of  land,  in 
every  sense  of  that  word,  and  under  all  circum¬ 
stances. 

3.  It  must  be  equitable. 

While  there  can  be  no  tax  on  the  value  principle 
that  is  not  a  tax  on  improvement,  which  is,  by  its 
very  nature,  progressive  value,  yet  there  is  value 
residing  in  real  property,  which  does  not  depend  on 
actual  improvement,  but  on  possible  improvement. 
This,  the  germ  of  right  inherent  in  ad  valorem  tax¬ 
ation,  is  the  right,  because  of  the  necessity,  to  tax 
that  part  of  value  which  arises  from  location,  and 
which  makes  necessary  some  arrangement  for  the 
classification  of  land  for  the  purposes  of  taxation. 
It  is  clear  enough  that  an  acre  of  land  which  is  favor¬ 
ably  located  for  purposes  of  improvement  ought  to 
bear  a  much  higher  tax  than  an  acre  the  location  of 
which  suggests  no  improvement  at  all.  A  scheme 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  61 

of  taxation  avowedly  for  the  purpose  of  promoting 
improvement  must  necessarily  take  into  account  the 
circumstances  which  make  the  question  of  improve¬ 
ment  one  of  importance  to  the  community.  If  we 
propose  to  tax  an  unimproved  town  lot  as  much  as 
we  tax  the  improved  lot  of  the  same  area  adjacent 
to  it,  then  it  will  be  necessary  to  tax  it  at  a  specific 
rate  which,  applied  to  a  less  favorably  located  lot, 
would  be  actually  prohibitory  of  improvement  ;  for  in 
the  latter  case  no  possible  form  of  improvement 
would,  under  the  prevailing  circumstances,  enable  the 
owner  even  to  reimburse  himself  for  the  tax,  much 
less  to  make  a  profit  or  a  living  out  of  the  business. 
Obviously  there  is  value,  in  the  one  case,  which  it  is 
just  and  necessary  to  tax  and  which  is  absent  in  the 
other  case  and  should  therefore  not  be  taxed.  This 
is  included  in  that  part  of  the  value  of  land  which  is 
called  by  political  economists  the  “  unearned  incre¬ 
ment.”  The  true  object  of  its  taxation  is,  not  to 
punish  the  owner  of  the  land  for  having  the  fore¬ 
sight  to  buy  that  land  when  it  was  cheap  and  hold 
for  a  rise,  but  to  promote  its  improvement.  We  are 
impelled  irresistibly  to  the  following  conclusion: 

So  far  as  it  is  advisable  to  tax  the  “  unearned  incre¬ 
ment,”  the  tax  thereon  should  be  so  imposed  as  to  pro¬ 
mote  improvement ,  and  it  is  therefore  absurd  to  tax  it 
according  to  any  principle  of  taxation  the  ejfect  of 
which  is,  in  general,  to  check  improvement . 


62 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


Let  us  see  how  far  the  principle  of  specific  tax- 
ation  will  meet  our  demands. 

First,  it  must  promote  distribution.  There  is  no 
possible  way  of  taxing  land  which  would  bring  its 
holder  so  directly  and  squarely  face  to  face  with  the 
fact  that  he  is  appropriating  more  than  his  share  of 
the  earth’s  surface,  as  taxation  according  to  the  area 
he  appropriates.  Its  natural  effect  upon  him  would 
be  to  reduce  the  area  monopolized  by  him  to  that 
which  he  could  actually  use  to  the  best  advantage. 
So  far  as  any  part  of  his  land  was  worthless  to  him 
for  present  purposes,  so  far  would  he  be  willing  to 
part  with  it  for  a  fair  consideration.  It  is  plain  that 
a  permanent  principle  of  area  taxation,  if  found  prac¬ 
ticable,  would  promote  distribution,  and  continue  to 
promote  it.  A  large  tract  of  land,  so  rich  in  valuable 
minerals  that  its  owners  could  afford  to  pay  specific 
taxes  on  it,  would  be  distributed  and  become  avail¬ 
able  for  agricultural  purposes  when  the  mineral 
resources  are  exhausted. 

Again,  area  taxation  would  promote  improvement. 

This  is  the  key-note  of  the  campaign  for  area  tax¬ 
ation,  whether  taken  with  reference  to  mineral  land, 
farm  land,  or  land  in  a  growing  community,  desirable 
for  building  purposes,  and  possessed  of  an  encourag¬ 
ing  “unearned  increment.” 

Producers  of  mineral  raw  material  would  not 
under  specific  taxes  lock  up  thousands  of  acres  for 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  63 

future  use  so  as  to  restrict  production  and  control 
the  market.  They  would  more  generally  operate 
under  leases  from  individual  holders,  and  would  buy 
only  such  land  as  they  could  afford  to  pay  the  area 
tax  on.  There  would  thus  be  less  monopoly  and 
more  competition  in  the  production  of  raw  material 
of  a  mineral  character,  like  coal  or  iron  ore. 

Farmers  would  take  the  advice  which  agricultural 
journals  and  conventions  have  been  giving  them  for 
years,  and  reduce  their  farms  to  the  area  which  they 
could  manage  most  profitably.  All  the  land  that 
anybody  really  wanted  would  come  into  the  market, 
within  a  convenient  distance  from  the  markets  for 
farm  products  ;  for  in  thickly  populated  districts, 
from  the  nature  of  the  case  and  the  volume  of  pub¬ 
lic  business  to  be  transacted,  the  expenses  of  local 
government  would  be  greater  and  tax  rates  higher 
and  more  prohibitory  of  monopoly  than  in  sparsely 
settled  regions. 

We  have  stipulated,  however,  that  the  ideal  prin¬ 
ciple  of  land  taxation  must  promote  improvement 
under  all  circumstances,  and  as  soon  as  we  come  to 
consider  the  comparative  workings  of  the  specific 
principle  upon  developed  and  undeveloped  land 
respectively,  we  are  obliged  to  entertain  the  impor¬ 
tant  subject  of  classification.  For  developed  or  im¬ 
proved  land  must  be  classed,  not  with  improved  land 
of  some  other  class,  but  with  unimproved  land  which 


64 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


would  be  brought  by  improvement  to  resemble  it,  so 
that  the  aim  of  taxation  may  be  to  secure  that  kind 
of  improvement  for  which  the  unimproved  land 
to  be  taxed  is  best  adapted.  It  is  now  easier  to 
see  the  unreasonableness  of  loosely  classifying  land 
as  land  improved  and  unimproved,  cultivated  and 
uncultivated.  It  is  not  easy  to  escape  this  conclu¬ 
sion  : 

The  capacity  of  the  community  in  which  the  taxable 
land  is  situated  is  the  proper  basis  of  classification  for 
purposes  of  taxation ,  and  not  the  degree  of  improve¬ 
ment  that  has  been  attained.  The  community  itself 
has  no  right  to  tax  the  value  that  its  growth  does 
not  produce,  and  the  nature  of  the  community  reg¬ 
isters  this  growth  in  its  municipal  institutions. 

Here  we  have  a  basis  of  classification  and  taxa¬ 
tion  which  bears  as  direct  a  relation  to  the  needs  of 
the  taxing  authority  as  may  be,  for  the  taxing 
authority  continually  tends  to  identify  itself  with  the 
most  prominent  interests  of  the  social  community, 
as  asserted  by  its  organized  government.  The 
social  community,  in  its  most  general  sense,  will  be 
found  to  create  the  limit  within  which  it  is  equitable 
and  productive  of  improvement  to  tax  unimproved 
land.  This  limit  may  not,  and  in  many  cases  can¬ 
not,  be  that  of  the  social  community  itself ;  but  so 
far  as  it  will  be  necessary  to  depart  from  such  a  theory 
of  it,  we  will  find  that  the  social  community  has  the 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  65 

power  to  fix  and  to  enforce  more  special  classifica¬ 
tion  within  itself. 

To  apply  these  general  statements  to  the  con¬ 
ditions  of  taxation  in  a  large  city,  insisting  in  gen¬ 
eral  on  the  principle  that  an  unimproved  lot  shall  be 
taxed  as  highly  as  an  improved  lot  of  the  same  size 
and  like  location,  the  first  class  of  taxable  land 
should  constitute  the  land  fronting  upon  the  princi¬ 
pal  thoroughfare,  within  those  blocks  most  desirable 
for  business  purposes  or  fashionable  residence. 
There  could  be  as  many  such  classes  as  circum¬ 
stances  might  demand.  There  would  be  decidedly 
fewer — there  could  not  possibly  be  more — com¬ 
plaints  of  discrimination  or  favoritism  on  the  part  of 
the  assessors  or  the  boards  of  revision  than  there 
are  under  the  valuation  system.  To  define  what 
fronts  upon  a  principal  street  and  what  blocks, 
bounded  by  other  streets,  should  constitute  the  var¬ 
ious  classes  for  purposes  of  taxation  would  be  as 
easy  a  matter  of  public  enactment  as  the  fixing  of 
the  boundaries  of  a  ward  or  precinct  for  electoral  or 
police  purposes,  and  the  publicity  of  the  definition 
would  afford  the  owner  of  the  property  taxed  high¬ 
est  the  compensation  of  a  proof  of  his  right  to  charge 
the  high  rents  which  tradesmen  are  willing  to  pay 
for  a  location  on  the  best  streets.  The  tradesman 
pays  higher  rents  for  the  landlord’s  higher  taxes 
now;  but  under  the  operation  of  specific  taxation 


66 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


law  he  would  be  protected  against  landlords  who 
make  higher  taxes  an  excuse  for  exorbitant  rents  ; 
since  he  could  easily  find  out  in  what  class  the 
property  was  taxed,  the  specific  rate  assessed 
upon  it,  and  how  far  his  landlord  was  justi¬ 
fied  in  raising  rents  on  this  account.  The  facilities 
for  concealment  afforded  by  the  necessity  of  assess¬ 
ing  every  property  separately  operate  in  favor  of  the 
landlord,  and  place  the  tenant  more  in  his  power 
than  the  latter  would  otherwise  be.  This  considera¬ 
tion  alone  is  an  important  argument  in  favor  of 
specific  taxation,  and  a  reason  why  those  who  do 
not  care  to  own  property,  but  are  willing  to  rent  it, 
should  support  such  a  reform. 

The  just  limits  of  such  classification  would  easily 
define  themselves.  Provision  could  be  made  for 
appeals  as  easily  as  now,  and  the  appeal  should  be 
announced  in  as  public  a  manner  as  the  original 
definition,  so  that  no  change  could  be  authorized 
without  good  reason.  The  publicity  incident  to  the 
whole  machinery  of  specific  taxation  would  in  itself 
be  a  feature  of  incalculable  value  as  a  prevention  of 
dishonesty,  injustice  or  evasion. 

County  authorities  could  in  like  manner  be  author¬ 
ized  to  classify  rural  property  for  taxation  ;  wild  and 
barren  land  constituting  one  class,  on  which  the  tax 
per  acre  could  be  adjusted  so  as  to  induce  the  owner 
to  investigate  the  possibilities  of  improvement,  and 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  6 7 

if  their  realization  were  found  to  be  beyond  his  indb 
vidual  power,  the  forfeiture  of  the  land  for  nonpay¬ 
ment  of  taxes  would  injure  no  one.  The  owner 
would  be  rather  benefited,  and  the  public  authorities 
would  be  free  to  sell  the  land  to  any  buyer  who 
thought  he  could  make  use  of  it. 

Arable  or  cleared  land  should  constitute  at  least 
one  class,  and  timber  land  another,  the  latter  to  be 
taxed  lower  because  of  the  increasing  necessity  of 
forest  preservation.  Plain  common  business-sense 
in  the  exercise  of  the  power  of  classification  would 
be  the  best  guarantee  against  oppression  or  discrim¬ 
ination.  The  fact  that  the  area  of  every  land¬ 
owner’s  property  is  already  a  matter  of  record  upon 
county  deed  books,  or  may  easily  be  computed  there¬ 
from,  would  facilitate  area  taxation  and  it  would  be 
an  easy  matter  after  the  completion  of  preliminary 
surveys  with  a  view  to  classification,  to  require  that 
deeds  should  contain  the  respective  areas  included 
in  each  class,  when  more  than  one  class  was  repre¬ 
sented  in  a  single  piece  of  property. 

The  third  question  to  be  answered  is,  whether 
taxation  according  to  such  a  plan  would  be  just  or 
equitable.  Would  its  burdens  be  distributed  in  pro¬ 
portion  to  the  actual  obligations  of  the  taxpayers  to 
the  community  ? 

It  is  only  fair  that  a  man  who  holds  more  land 
than  he  can  use  should  be  subjected  to  some  limit- 


68 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


ing  influence,  for,  as  we  have  seen,  land  is  of  increas¬ 
ing  importance  to  the  welfare  of  the  whole  people. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  only  fair  that  a  general 
arrangement  should  be  made  under  which  a  man 
who  could  use  a  large  area  should  be  at  liberty  to  do 
so.  To  let  him  use  as  much  land  as  he  wants  so 
long  as  he  recognizes  the  public  right  in  the  matter 
by  paying  the  tax  in  proportion  to  the  actual  amount 
used,  is  more  in  accordance  with  democratic  princi¬ 
ples  than  it  would  be  to  fix  an  arbitrary  limit  to  the 
area  which  a  single  owner  could  own  ;  nor  could  it 
be  so  readily  evaded  as  the  latter  species  of  provi¬ 
sion,  under  which  a  man  could  transfer  tracts  of  land 
to  his  relations  and  thus  escape  the  penalty.  If  the 
land  were  evenly  taxed,  it  would  make  no  difference 
who  owned  it. 

“  But,”  it  is  objected,  “  is  it  just  to  confiscate  a 
man’s  property  because  he  is  unable  to  improve  it 
or  to  pay  the  taxes  on  it?  ”  It  is  certainly  just  if 
the  good  of  the  community  requires  it.  The  good 
of  the  community  justifies  a  railroad  company  in 
taking  a  man’s  land  for  its  tracks,  unless  he  incor¬ 
porates  another  railroad  company  and  builds  tracks 
on  his  land  himself,  and  even  then  the  other  com¬ 
pany  may  take  his  house  itself  or  any  other  part  of 
his  property  it  wants,  in  order  to  secure  a  right  of 
way.  Neither  form  of  confiscation  robs  him,  so 
long  as  there  is  provision  for  the  payment  o(  a  fair 


AD  VALOREM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXA  TION.  69 

award  of  damages.  He  is  in  most  cases  compen¬ 
sated,  both  directly  and  indirectly.  The  railroad 
improves  the  value  of  his  adjacent  property  and  so 
will  the  other  form  of  confiscation  in  the  public 
interest.  He  can  get  a  better  price  if  he  sells  and  a 
higher  rent  if  he  continues  to  own  land  in  the  vicinity. 
The  development  of  the  community  improves  the 
market  for  every  thing  that  he  produces  or  handles. 
If  a  corporation  can  confiscate  useful  land  to  make 
it  more  useful,  the  people  can  surely  confiscate  use¬ 
less  land  to  make  it  useful. 

A  member  of  the  Pennsylvania  legislature,  after 
hearing  argument  upon  a  proposed  amendment  to 
the  Constitution  of  the  State,  providing  for  the 
specific  or  area  taxation  of  land,  objected  that  such 
a  change  would  make  the  rich  richer  and  the  poor 
poorer.  This  objection  is  worth  examination. 

Let  us  suppose  two  large  farms,  side  by  side,  both 
under  partial  cultivation  only.  The  owner  of  one 
is  rich,  the  owner  of  the  other  is  “  land-poor.’'  On 
the  introduction  of  area  taxation,  the  rich  farmer 
would  pay  his  taxes,  but  he  would  cultivate  his 
whole  farm  to  make  every  acre  pay  its  share.  Thus 
the  objection  might  be  partly  true  ;  the  rich  might 
possibly  become  richer.  It  is  a  question,  however, 
whether  he  would  not  find  that  he  could  do  more 
and  increase  his  wealth  faster  by  reducing  his  area, 
and  so  sell  a  part.  In  either  event  the  increased 


7° 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


production  of  that  farm  would  increase  the  supply 
of  food  or  raw  material  in  the  public  market.  The 
poor  could  buy  provisions  so  much  cheaper,  and  the 
manufacturers  who  employed  them  could  buy  raw 
material  cheaper  and  hence  pay  better  wages  or 
employ  more  of  the  aforesaid  poor.  This  is  cer¬ 
tainly  not  making  the  poor  poorer. 

Now  let  us  see  what  would  happen  to  the  other 
farmer — the  land-poor  man.  He  could  not  pay  the 
taxes  on  all  his  unproductive  land,  so  he  would 
figure  up  how  much  he  could  use  and  make  pay  its 
own  taxes  and  then  he  would  sell  the  rest.  For  it 
he  would  receive  money,  which  he  could  either  put 
into  fertilizers,  better  buildings,  machinery,  live 
stock  or  miscellaneous  investments  without  neces¬ 
sarily  rendering  himself  liable  to  increased  taxation 
thereby.  If  he  used  the  purchase-money  wisely,  he 
would  be  richer,  not  poorer,  as  a  result  of  the  “  con¬ 
fiscation  ”  of  part  of  his  land.  Meanwhile  the  pur¬ 
chaser  of  the  sold  land  would  probably  improve  it, 
thus  at  any  rate  raising  the  average  value  of  land 
in  the  neighborhood  and  possibly  increasing  the 
population  so  as  to  enlarge  the  market  for  farm 
products.  Both  buyer  and  seller  ought  to  be 
benefited. 

It  is  not  easy  to  see  where  the  influence  that  would 
make  the  poor  poorer  would  come  in.  The  poor  in 
general  would  be  benefited  by  the  fact  that  more 


AD  V  AERO  EM  AND  SPECIFIC  TAXATION.  71 

land  came  into  the  market  for  sale  and  a  house  was 
easier  to  get. 

So  far  as  “  confiscation  ”  by  this  indirect  method 
becomes  necessary,  so  far  would  the  supply  of  capi¬ 
tal  available  for  building  and  industrial  enterprises 
be  increased,  for  the  money  that  was  taken  out  of 
land  would  seek  other  channels  of  investment. 
Houses  in  which  the  poor  could  live  and  factories 
where  they  could  be  employed  would  be  multiplied, 
for  small  houses  pay  a  bigger  interest  than  most 
other  forms  of  investment ;  and  the  increased  devel¬ 
opment  in  the  soil  would  result  in  the  discovery  of 
increased  quantities  and  varieties  of  raw  material. 
Thus  area  taxation  would  be  likely  to  preserve  and 
promote  the  tendency  of  population  to  flow  from 
the  country  to  the  cities,  by  diversifying  indus¬ 
tries. 

To  recapitulate:  we  have  found  that  the  specific 
taxation  of  land,  or  the  taxation  of  land  areas, 
meets  the  three  requirements  that  it  must  promote 
distribution,  promote  improvement,  and  be  equi¬ 
table.  The  question  of  its  practicability  demands 
some  further  consideration. 


CHAPTER  V. 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION. 

“  A  practical  man  is  a  man  who  practices  the  blunders  of  his 
predecessors.” — Lord  Beacon sfield. 

HEN  England  imposed  an  excise  tax  on  all 


V  V  panes  of  window  glass  beyond  a  certain  size, 
the  windowpanes  of  most  of  the  houses  in  that  country 
shrunk  as  if  by  magic.  Every  body  seemed  to  want  to 


get  away  from  the  tax.  The  object  of  the  excise  tax 


in  question  was  of  course  the  raising  of  a  revenue, 
and  oppressive  as  the  tax  was,  it  can  easily  be  seen  that 
it  was  not  easy  for  any  one  who  was  justly  liable 
for  its  payment  to  evade  it.  One’s  window  panes 
were  substantially  visible  from  the  outside  of  the 
house,  and  the  tax  could  be  readily  computed  by 
means  of  simple  measurements.  It  was  not  like  a 
tax  on  watches  or  money  at  interest  or  other  things 
which  could  be  concealed  from  the  assessor,  or  about 
which,  if  matters  were  privately  arranged  with  the 
assessor,  no  third  party  need  ever  be  wiser.  The 
only  way  in  which  the  window  pane  tax  could  be 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION. 


73 


evaded  was  by  reducing  the  size  of  one’s  window 
panes  until  the  limit  of  exemption  was  reached. 
Whether  this  tax,  as  a  source  of  revenue,  was  a 
success  or  not,  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  would  have 
been  regarded  as  a  success  if  its  object  had  been  to 
make  people  use  smaller  panes  in  their  windows.  If 
it  had  been  imposed  in  the  interest  of  some  manu¬ 
facturer  who  made  small  panes  of  glass  only,  it 
would  probably  have  made  him  rich. 

Why  should  it  have  been  a  greater  success  as  an 
influence  in  favor  of  the  use  of  smaller  window 
panes  than  as  a  source  of  revenue?  Because  it 
appealed  to  the  tax-dodging  instinct  of  human 
nature.  There  is  something  more  or  less  fascinating 
to  the  usual  mind  in  the  idea  of  evading  a  tax.  It 
is  possibly  an  inherited  tendency,  born  in  the  days 
of  tyrannical  rulers  whose  taxes  were  presumably 
extortionate  and  were  collected  to  satisfy  their  indi¬ 
vidual  greed.  The  tax  dodging  tendency  is  not 
wholly  dishonest.  It  is  a  rebellion  of  the  individual 
against  the  idea  that  he  is  not  entitled  to  spend  all 
money  that  he  earns. 

It  is  one  of  those  characteristics  of  human  nature 
which  ought  to  be  of  the  greatest  value  to  the  prac¬ 
tical  statesman.  Indeed,  the  really  practical  states¬ 
man — for  the  old  fogy  is  the  statesman  punctured 
by  Lord  Beaconsfield’s  satirical  definition — is  he  who 
makes  the  best  use  of  just  such  characteristics  as  the 


74 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


tax  dodging  instinct.  Every  such  characteristic 
becomes  his  servant  instead  of  his  master. 

About  the  only  object  of  taxation  that  is  more 
certainly  out  of  doors  than  the  window  panes  is  the 
land  itself.  Its  area  is  easily  ascertained,  for  it  is 
lying  around  where  every  body  can  see  it.  It  can 
not  be  carried  in  the  pocket,  like  a  watch,  or  locked 
up  in  a  bank  vault  like  a  bond.  A  tax  on  the  area 
of  land,  subject  to  the  necessities  of  the  community 
imposing  the  tax,  could  be  as  easily  imposed  and  as 
easily  collected  as  a  tax  on  window  panes  of  a  cer¬ 
tain  size.  But  that  it  would  break  up  land  into 
small  areas  is  even  more  certain  than  that  it  would 
insure  a  steady  revenue. 

If  we  suppose  a  new-found  and  fertile  country  to 
be  peopled  by  a  colony,  and  that  when  the  colony 
came  to  consider  the  question  of  revenue,  only  one 
member  of  it  knew  any  thing  about  the  taxation  of 
land  on  the  ad  valorem  principle,  it  is  difficult  to 
avoid  the  conclusion  that  when  it  came  to  a  compari¬ 
son  of  that  method  with  the  specific  method,  it 
would  be  the  ad  valorem  method,  not  the  specific, 
that  would  have  to  bear  the  stigma  of  impractica¬ 
bility.  The  conversation  might  be  something  like 
the  following : 

First  Colonist. — I  propose  that  we  survey  our  hold¬ 
ings  of  land,  record  the  area  transferred  when  we 
transfer  any  from  one  to  the  other,  and  pay  every 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION .  75 

year  into  the  common  fund  a  tax  directly  related  to 
the  area  occupied  by  the  tax-payer. 

Second  Colonist. — I  propose,  as  a  substitute  for  that 
proposition,  that  we  have  an  assessor  to  assess  every 
piece  of  property  at  stated  intervals,  and  that  a  cer¬ 
tain  small  fraction  of  its  value  be  paid  into  the  com¬ 
mon  fund. 

It  would  not  seem  unnatural,  under  these  circum¬ 
stances,  to  hear  a  third  colonist  speak  as  follows : 

Third  Colonist. — The  first  plan  is  much  the  more 
direct  and  simple.  It  is  wasting  a  man  to  have  him 
assess  every  property  over  again  so  often,  when  he 
might  be  doing  something  of  more  use  to  the  colony. 
Besides,  the  assessor  would  have  to  be  a  man,  as 
there  are  no  angels  in  the  colony,  and  he  might  not 
be  impartial.  He  might  even  be  guilty  of  gross 
favoritism  and  corruption.  We  would  never  know  just 
how  much  we  would  have  to  pay  until  he  told  us. 
On  the  other  hand,  with  the  area  plan,  each  one  of 
us  would  know  just  how  much  he  would  have  to  pay 
as  soon  as  the  tax  rate  per  acre  for  his  district  was 
announced,  and  he  could  tell  by  reference  to  the  deed 
book,  which  recorded  his  neighbor’s  area,  just  how 
much  his  neighbor  would  have  to  pay.  Every  man 
could  thus  be  better  prepared  to  meet  the  tax,  and 
it  would  be  less  oppressive  to  him  ;  and  the  colony’s 
income  would  be  more  certain  ;  thus  we  would  not 
be  liable  to  an  increase  of  the  tax  rate  as  we  would 


76 


TAX  THE  AREA . 


under  the  other  plan  and  its  uncertainties.  Friend, 
your  ad  valorem  plan  is  comparatively  impracticable, 
I  am  afraid  you  would  rather  be  an  assessor  than  an 
industrious  colonist. 

The  specific  taxation  of  land  can  be  realized  if  its 
pecuniary  advantages  to  the  individual  are  brought 
home  to  him  along  the  lines  of  thought  suggested 
by  our  friend  the  third  colonist.  For  the  average 
individual  cares  less  for  the  benefits  which  may 
accrue  to  the  human  race  as  a  whole,  or  to  his  own 
intellectual  and  moral  nature,  than  for  the  consider¬ 
ations  that  affect  his  personal  comfort.  A  big  book 
might  be  written,  as  this  little  book  is  written,  to 
prove  that  the  specific  taxation  of  land  is  a  great 
humanitarian  scheme,  and  it  would  not  have  one 
tenth  as  much  effect  on  him  as  a  simple  little  table 
of  figures,  showing  that,  as  a  result  of  the  saving 
effected  by  abolishing  assessors  and  placing  a  tax 
on  unimproved  land  to  encourage  its  improvement, 
his  total  tax  bill  would  be  less  under  the  specific 
system  than  under  the  ad  valorem  system.  But 
almost  any  thing  can  be  proved  by  the  aid  of  statis¬ 
tics,  and  they  are  introduced  here  chiefly  for  the 
purpose  of  illustration.  There  are  two  counties  in 
the  State  of  Pennsylvania  which  will  serve  to  illus¬ 
trate  the  extremes  of  a  high  and  a  low  state  of  rural 
development.  The  first  of  these  is  Lancaster,  for 
some  years  the  banner  agricultural  county  of  the 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION.  77 

United  States.  The  value  of  real  estate  in  Lancas¬ 
ter  county  in  the  year  1885,  exclusive  of  the  only 
two  formally  incorporated  municipalities  within  it 
— the  city  of  Lancaster  and  the  borough  of  Colum¬ 
bia — was  $70,000,000.  At  the  time  of  the  census 
enumeration  of  1880  the  improved  area  of  Lancaster 
county  was  490,922  acres,  in  a  total  area  of  621,000 
acres.  The  tax  rate  of  two  and  a  half  mills  on  the 
dollar  produces  a  nominal  revenue  of  $175,000, 
although  the  actual  collections  are  considerably  less, 
as  a  result  of  the  evasions  and  favoritism  incident  to 
the  ad  valorem  method  of  assessment.  This  is  an 
average  of  35.6  cents  per  acre  of  improved  land, 
supposing  the  unimproved  land  to  be  practically 
exempt  from  taxation  ;  not  an  oppressive  rate,  con¬ 
sidering  the  value  per  acre,  as  measured  by  the  pro¬ 
ductive  capacity  of  Lancaster  county  land,  where 
one  tobacco  planter  for  the  season  of  1886  realized 
a  profit  of  $360  per  acre.  Now  suppose  that  the 
county  commissioners  were  to  classify  the  130,078 
acres  of  unimproved  land  for  taxation  on  the  specific 
principle.  A  considerable  portion  of  it,  say  10,000 
acres,  could  be  properly  assessed  as  highly  as  the 
improved  land,  because  equally  capable  of  improve¬ 
ment.  This  would  bring  in  $3560  additional  rev¬ 
enue.  If  we  suppose  20,078  acres  of  the  remainder 
to  be  taxable  at  20  cents  an  acre  only,  according  to 
some  just  average  of  classification,  this  would  bring 


78 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


in  $4015.60  more  revenue.  Now  if  a  tax  of  10  cents 
per  acre  were  imposed  on  the  100,000  acres  remain¬ 
ing  to  be  considered,  this  would  produce  $10,000 
more,  making  the  total  additional  revenue  $17,575.- 
60,  or  more  than  10  per  cent,  of  the  amount  sup¬ 
posed  to  be  raised,  and  that  is  practically  raised  at 
present,  from  the  improved  land.  The  result  of  such 
an  assessment  of  the  unimproved  acreage  would, 
even  in  a  county  so  highly  developed  as  Lancaster, 
be  likely  to  effect  a  ten  per  cent,  reduction  in  the 
burden  of  taxation  borne  by  improved  real  property. 

The  county  of  Cameron  is  the  least  improved  in 
Pennsylvania,  considering  its  area,  which  is  243,200 
acres,  of  which  there  are  9786  acres  in  improved 
farms.  The  county  tax  rate  is  12  1-2  mills  on  the 
dollar,  or  one  of  the  highest  in  the  State — the  Lan¬ 
caster  rate  being  the  lowest.  The  taxable  real 
estate  in  1885  was  assessed  at  $716,528,  while  the 
value  of  the  9,786  acres  of  improved  farm  land,  as 
reported  by  the  census  of  1880,  was  $609,820.  The 
taxable  valuation  of  $716,528  produces  a  theoretical 
revenue  of  $8956.60  at  the  tax  rate  above  men¬ 
tioned  ;  an  average  tax  of  3.6  cents  per  acre  if  the 
improved  and  the  unimproved  land  be  averaged  in¬ 
discriminately.  But  let  us  try  to  find  out  what  pro¬ 
portion  of  the  burden  is  actually  borne  by  improved 
property.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  in  Penn¬ 
sylvania  the  ad  valorem  method  has  encouraged  a 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION.  79 

system  of  undervaluation  which,  according  to  the 
report  of  the  Secretary  of  Internal  Affairs  for  1885, 
makes  the  assessed  value  of  realty  vary  from  one-fifth 
to  four-fifths  of  the  market  value,  its  usual  ratio 
being  one-half.  The  improved  land  which,  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  census,  was  worth  $609,820,  is  probably 
assessed  even  now  at  $304,910  for  purposes  of  taxa¬ 
tion,  and  at  12  1-2  mills,  produces  a  revenue  of 
$3811.37,  or  what  would  be  raised  by  a  tax  of  39 
cents  per  acre  of  improved  land;  leaving  $5145.23 
to  be  raised  from  the  233,414  acres  of  unimproved 
land,  or  an  average  of  2.2  cents  an  acre  only.  It  is 
not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the  farmers  in  half- 
developed  counties,  or  those  less-than-half-developed, 
complain  of  unequal  taxation.  Here  are  figures  that 
show  that  they  pay  nearly  twenty  times  as  much  as 
is  paid  by  the  speculator,  who  has  bought  50,000 
acres  of  wood-land  and  is  locking  it  up  against  im¬ 
provement  until  the  opportunity  arrives  for  such 
improvement  as  he  can  make  with  profit  to  his 
own  pocket,  or  for  a  handsome  profit  by  selling 
out. 

In  many  of  the  counties  of  this  type  the  unim¬ 
proved  land  is  held  by  men  who  are  “  land  poor  ”  ; 
men  without  capital  to  clear  and  develop  it,  or  even 
to  advertise  its  advantages,  if  it  has  any.  Here  is 
an  opportunity  to  make  the  State  land-offices  use¬ 
ful.  When  such  wild  land  is  sold  for  non-payment 


8o 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


of  taxes  it  should,  in  default  of  individual  purchase, 
become  the  property  of  the  State  and  the  county 
jointly  on  the  payment,  by  the  State  to  the  county, 
of  one-half  of  the  tax  bill  thereon.  The  State  land- 
office  should  issue  bulletins,  from  time  to  time,  de¬ 
scribing  the  lands  that  have  come  under  its  control 
by  this  method.  There  is  no  doubt  that  such  a 
harmless  confiscation  of  wild  land  would  open  up 
for  settlement  many  thousands  of  acres  in  the  East¬ 
ern  and  Southern  States. 

Lancaster  and  Cameron  counties,  which  have  been 
used  for  illustration,  are  among  the  twenty-two 
counties  of  Pennsylvania  in  which  the  ad  valorem 
system  has  not  gone  to  the  absurd  length  of  bring¬ 
ing  down  the  total  realty  valuation  for  taxable  pur¬ 
poses  to  less  than  the  census  valuation  of  improved 
land.  In  forty -jive  counties  of  Pennsylvania  the  im¬ 
proved  land ,  according  to  the  census  of  1880,  is  worth 
more  than  the  assessed  values  of  all  the  land  in  those 
counties  respectively  for  the  census  year !  Of  the 
twenty-two  exceptions  to  this  rule,  fifteen  are  so 
only  by  reason  of  containing  cities  or  large  and  pop¬ 
ulous  towns.  In  such  counties  the  total  of  improved 
farm  values  bears,  of  course,  a  smaller  ratio  to  the 
total  realty  valuation  than  in  the  others.  There  are 
no  cities  or  large  towns  in  Cameron  county,  and  the 
rule  of  official  assessment  in  that  rural  region  prob¬ 
ably  comes  nearer  the  outside  limit  of  value  men- 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION. 


81 


tioned  by  the  Secretary  of  Internal  Affairs — four- 
fifths — than  in  most  counties. 

These  figures  show  that  such  revenue  as  is  now 
raised  by  taxation  according  to  the  value  of  both 
land  and  improvements  can  be  raised  by  the  tax¬ 
ation  of  land  according  to  its  area,  regardless  of  the 
artificial  improvements  thereon,  but  subject  to  such 
principles  of  classification  as  the  demand  for  im¬ 
provement  might  dictate. 

They  also  indicate  that  every  change  that  could 
be  made  in  the  direction  of  these  reforms  would 
reduce  the  burden  of  taxation  upon  the  agricultural 
classes,  whose  improved  land  now  bears  more  than 
its  share  of  that  burden,  while  the  unimproved  land 
bears  less,  whether  it  is  capable  of  improvement  or 
not.  The  area  of  wild  land  is  not  always  easily 
ascertained,  it  is  true  ;  but  it  is  generally  expressed 
in  acres  for  purposes  of  sale  between  man  and  man, 
and  the  price  paid  is  represented  by  a  specific  sum 
of  money  per  acre.  It  ought  to  be  no  more 
trouble  to  tax  it  by  the  acre  in  its  proper  class,  than 
to  sell  it  by  the  acre. 

Any  advocate  of  area  taxation  who  expects  to 
secure  the  enactment  of  a  law  introducing  the 
system  throughout  any  particular  state,  whatever  its 
size  or  the  nature  of  its  surface,  for  a  long  time  to 
come,  will  be  likely  to  find  himself  deceived.  The 
principle  of  specific  taxation,  however,  is  so  reason- 


82 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


able  and  its  application  so  simple  when  it  is  once 
established,  that  one  measure  after  another  in  which 
it  was  introduced  piecemeal  could  be  put  through 
without  exciting  appreciable  opposition. 

The  value  of  real  estate  in  large  cities  tends  to 
become  more  and  more  a  question  of  the  area  of  the 
lot,  and  less  a  question  of  the  house  on  it.  One 
might  be  disposed  to  think,  therefore,  that  classi¬ 
fied  area  or  specific  taxation  might  be  most  easily 
introduced  in  large  cities ;  but  it  need  cause  no 
surprise  if  the  first  organized  movement  for  its  real¬ 
ization  should  relate  most  directly  to  the  wildest 
mountain  regions — the  sources  of  streams.  The 
forestry  question  is  increasing  in  importance  in  all 
parts  of  the  United  States.  In  Pennsylvania,  dur¬ 
ing  the  last  session  of  the  legislature,  a  bill  was 
passed  remitting  in  part  the  taxes  of  land-owners 
who  planted , their  land  with  forest  trees  in  number 
not  less  than  1200  to  the  acre,  as  follows:  For  a 
period  of  ten  years  after  the  land  has  been  so 
planted  a  sum  equal  to  ninety  per  cent,  of  all  the 
taxes  annually  assessed  and  paid  upon  the  said  land, 
or  so  much  of  the  said  ninety  per  centum  as  shall 
not  exceed  the  sum  of  forty-five  cents  per  acre. 

For  a  second  period  of  ten  years  a  sum  equal  to 
eighty  per  centum  of  the  said  taxes,  or  so  much  of 
the  said  eighty  per  centum  as  shall  not  exceed  the 
sum  of  forty  cents  per  acre. 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION.  S3 

For  a  third  and  final  period  of  ten  years  a  sum 
equal  to  fifty  per  cent,  of  the  said  taxes,  or  so 
much  of  the  said  fifty  per  centum  as  shall  not  exceed 
the  sum  of  twenty-five  cents  per  acre. 

Here  is  an  entering  wedge  for  the  introduction  of 
the  specific  method  of  taxing  land.  The  value  of 
the  whole  tract  that  may  be  owned  by  any  given 
individual  is  not  considered  at  all,  except  with 
reference  to  the  specific  amount  that  may  be  taxed 
out  of  each  acre  of  it.  And  that  is  all  that  the 
public,  or  the  community,  has  to  do  with  its  value. 
It  has  no  right  to  know  what  that  value  is.  That 
value  is  the  owner’s  own  business,  and  the  commu¬ 
nity  has  no  rights  in  the  premises  except  to  provide 
for  its  own  expenses,  and  to  see  that  the  individual 
does  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  other  individ¬ 
uals.  The  Pennsylvania  law  for  the  encouragement 
of  forestry  is  a  significant,  because  an  involuntary 
and  even  an  unconscious,  recognition  of  the  fact  that 
the  regulation  of  land  in  the  public  interest  must 
sooner  or  later  take  cognizance  of  area,  and  that  no 
intelligent  solution  of  the  problem  is  possible  with¬ 
out  recognizing  area  as  the  most  important  factor. 
It  is  desirable  to  limit  the  area  held  by  one  tenant ; 
it  is  not  desirable  to  limit  the  value  of  that  area. 
Therefore  area,  and  not  value,  should  be  the  subject 
of  the  most  important  land  laws. 

It  is  as  practicable  to  introdnce  area  taxation  in 


84 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


any  large  city  as  it  is  to  get  a  new  city  charter  from 
the  legislature.  The  first  step  could  be  a  law  ex¬ 
empting  improvements  from  taxation,  and  taxing 
lots  according  to  the  value  per  front  foot.  This 
would  be  practicable  according  to  Lord  Beacons- 
field’s  sarcastic  definition  of  the  practical  man  ;  for  it 
would  retain  one  of  the  two  big  blunders  of  the  old 
law.  After  awhile  it  would  occur  to  somebody  of 
a  really  practical  turn  of  mind,  that  it  would  be  a 
good  plan  to  assess  a  whole  square  front  at  one  time 
instead  of  assessing  each  lot  on  that  square  separ¬ 
ately,  and  all  the  lots  on  that  front  could  be  classi¬ 
fied  as  class  A.  If  the  lots  on  another  square  front¬ 
ing  on  the  same  street,  were  considered  as  equally 
valuable,  or  if  a  blockful  of  lots  on  any  other  street 
were  considered  as  valuable,  they  could  all  be  thrown 
into  class  A  too.  The  next  most  valuable  class  of 
lots,  as  defined  by  published  and  public  boundaries 
could  be  known  as  class  B,  the  next  as  class  C,  and 
so  forth,  until  the  whole  city  was  classified  in  large 
or  small  classes.  After  this,  the  substitution  of  a 
specific  tax  rate  per  square  foot  would  be  a  simple 
matter.  The  work  of  classification  should  be 
announced  in  the  newspapers,  so  that  the  utmost 
opportunity  could  be  given  for  appeal  and  revision. 
Such  a  system  of  assessment  would  be  nothing  more 
revolutionary  than  the  extension  of  the  system  by 
which  real  estate  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia  is  now 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION  85 

divided  into  the  three  classes  of  city  property,  sub¬ 
urban  property,  and  farm  property.  The  difference 
which  constitutes  the  basis  of  this  classification  ap¬ 
pears  in  the  three  tax  rates,  fixed  according  to  the 
ad  valorem  or  percentage  principle.  To  have  a  few 
more  classes,  and  to  fix  a  specific  tax  rate  per  square 
foot  for  each,  would  be  much  easier  than  it  looks. 
There  would  be  more  work  for  the  classifying  and 
rate-making  authority,  but  the  work  of  that  authority 
is  done  in  “  the  keen  bright  sunlight  of  publicity.” 
There  would  be  much  less  work  for  the  assessors  ; 
so  much  less,  in  fact,  that  there  might  not  necessarily 
be  any  assessors  ;  but  then  the  work  of  assessors  is 
done  in  the  dark,  and  there  would  be  room  for  a 
sweeping  reduction  of  expenses  in  any  plan  that  con¬ 
templated  getting  rid  of  this  army  of  ward  politicians. 
Dispensing  with  assessors  could  be  endured  with 
perfect  equanimity  by  the  entire  business  community, 
for  the  official  assessments  are  almost  valueless  to 
that  community,  so  far  removed  are  they  from  the 
actual,  or,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  the  prob¬ 
able  market  valuations.  In  the  cities  as  in  the 
country,  buyers  and  sellers  can  value  property  for 
themselves  or  secure  expert  opinion  from  those  who 
can  ;  they  do  not  need  the  public  valuation  as  such, 
and  they  seldom  rely  on  it  as  a  safe  guide. 

The  most  important  element  of  the  practicability 
of  new  legislation  is  that  which  is  involved  in  the 


86 


TAX  THE  AREA. 


question:  are  the  people  ready  for  it?  In  fact,, 
when  the  education  of  the  public  into  a  belief  in  the 
need  of  the  thing  proposed  is  done,  the  thing  itself 
is  practically  done,  and  the  politicians  and  others  in 
the  legislative  bodies  will  be  quick  to  respond.  It 
may  be  asked  then,  why  all  this  agitation  of  the 
land  question?  Is  it  not  premature?  Is  there 
any  general  demand  for  reform  legislation  on  the 
subject  ? 

Such  questions  as  these  are  asked  because  few 
people  have  any  idea  of  the  extent  to  which  land 
monopoly  has  already  been  indulged  in  this  country. 
Enormous  as  our  public  domain  is  supposed  to  be, 
the  press  of  the  West  is  already  saying  that  all  the 
desirable  large  tracts  of  government  land  have  been 
taken  up.  The  present  national  administration  has 
taken  some  steps  to  throw  open  desirable  regions 
to  the  public  here  and  there ;  but  it  is  for  the  local. 
State,  or  territorial  governments,  in  which  police, 
power  and  the  right  of  direct  taxation  resides,  to 
adopt  permanent  measures  for  the  arrest  of  the 
monopoly  tendency.  If  institutions  which  favor 
the  accumulation  of  the  land  by  a  few  owners  are 
allowed  to  continue,  the  few  owners  will  continue 
to  monopolize  land.  A  world  with  an  infinite  area 
is  the  only  one  to  which  the  question  of  land 
monopoly  is  unimportant,  for  it  is  the  only  con¬ 
ceivable  kind  of  world  in  which  the  land  monopolist 


PRACTICABILITY  OF  AREA  TAXATION.  87 

can  accumulate  all  the  land  he  wants  and  still  leave 
plenty  for  every  body  else. 

The  people,  however,  who  suffer  because  of  the 
monopolization  of  land  are  less  numerous  than  those 
who  suffer  because  of  the  non-improvement  of  land. 
We  do  not  all  want  to  go  West  to  take  up  land. 
Many,  indeed,  have  not  the  means  to  go  where  they 
can  get  land.  But  the  cry  of  hard  times  can  be 
heard  in  the  East  as  well  as  in  the  West.  Every 
State,  every  county,  every  good  citizen,  would  like 
to  see  better  times  right  at  home.  For  this  the 
repeal  of  the  tax  which  handicaps  improvement  is 
needed.  But  that  is  not  all.  The  specific  taxation 
of  the  ground  itself  is  needed  to  secure  improve¬ 
ments  of  all  kinds,  agricultural  as  well  as  architec¬ 
tural,  and  to  stimulate  local  development  and  pro¬ 
duction.  In  this  way  our  national  dependence  on 
transportation  facilities  would  be  reduced  to  a 
minimum,  but  without  impairing  the  usefulness  of 
those  facilities  as  factors  in  distribution  and  develop¬ 
ment.  If  the  agitation  of  any  question  of  interest 
to  the  public  is  premature,  it  is  that  of  the  question 
of  the  distribution  of  the  products  of  the  soil  in 
advance  of  the  discussion  of  the  distribution  of  the 
soil  itself.  The  problem  of  interstate  commerce  is  the 
cart  only ;  the  land  question  is  the  horse.  If  we  get  the 
horse  into  first  rate  condition,  the  cart  will  follow  it 
smoothly  enough, and  will  require  much  less  attention. 


marks  the  women  of  our  households  when  they  undertake  to  make  their 
homes  bright  and  cheery.  Nothing  deters  them.  Their  weary  work  may 
be  as  long  as  the  word  which  begins  this  paragraph,  but  they  prove  their 
regard  for  decent  homes  by  their  indefatigability.  What  a  pity  that  any 
of  them  should  add  to  their  toil  by  neglecting  to  use  Sapolio.  It  reduces 
the  labor  of  cleaning  and  scouring  at  least  one-half.  10c.  a  cake.  Sold  by 
all  grocers. 


ARANmOKT  PHYSIOS 


Dr.  A.  W.  Thompson,  Northampton,  Mass.,  says:  “I  have  tested  the 
Gluten  Suppositories,  and  consider  them  valuable,  as  indeed,  I  expected 
from  the  excellence  of  their  theory.’’ 

Dr.  Wm.  Too  Helmuth  declares  the  Gluten  Suppositories  to  be  “  the 
best  remedy  for  constipation  which  I  have  ever  prescribed.” 

‘‘As  Sancho  Panza  said  of  sleep,  so  say  I  of  your  Gluten  Suppositories  : 
God  bless  the  man  who  invented  them!” — E.  L.  Ripley,  Burlington,  Vt. 

“  I  prescribe  the  Gluten  Suppositories  almost  daily  in  my  practice  and 
am  often  astonished  at  the  permanent  results  obtained.” — J.  Montfort 
Schley,  M.D.,  Professor  Physical  Diagnosis  Woman’s  Medical  College, 
New  York  City. 

HEALTH  FOOD  CO.,  75  4th  Avenue,  N.  Y.l 


THE  BEST 

WASHING  COMPOUND 

EVER  INVENTED. 

No  Lady,  Married  or 
Single,  Kich  or  Poor, 
Housekeeping'  or 
Hoarding,  will  l>e 
without  it  after  test-- 
ing  its  utility. 

Sold  by  all  first-class 
Orocers,l»ut  beware  of 
worthless  imitations. 


SOCIALISM  IN  ACTION 


i 


It  is  the  distinguishing  feature  of  the  Labor  Movement  that  it 
strives  after  the  attainment  of  a  social  state  for  every  human, 
being,  such  as  shall  be  the  healthy  stimulation  of  all  his  good 
qualities,  while  his  bad  tendencies  shall  wither  and  drop  away 
from  him  by  the  impossibility  of  their  sustenance. 


To  get  at  this  conception  of  the  possible  life  of  man,  has  re¬ 
quired  the  experience  of  every  day  and  every  year,  since  the  race 
arrived  at  the  ability  to  keep  a  record  of  its  progress. 


The  process  of  the  seasons,  the  growth  and  ripening  of  the  crops 
has  been  the  lesson  nature  has  afforded  for  the  study  of  her 
methods,  and  this  ceaseless  repetition  has  finally  awakened  man  to 
the  conception  that  his  own  life  allies  him  to  the  same  law  of 
development. 


This  is  the  measure  of  the  socialist  movement  of  the  present,  and 
for  those  who  desire  to  take  part  in  its  furtherance  we  would  com¬ 
mend  the  study  of  SOCIAL  SOLUTIONS.  * 

The  main  purpose  of  this  publication  was  to  issue  the  transla¬ 
tion  by  Marie  Howland  of  the  first  public  statement  by  M.  Godin, 
of  the  study  and  experience  he  has  illustrated  in  the  construction 
and  organization  of  the  FAMILISTERE. 

Though  the  translation  of  this  most  important  demonstration  of 
the  new  life  for  labor  was  announced  when  it  was  prepared,  by  one 
of  the  chief  publishers  of  this  country,  yet  being  abandoned  on  the 
ground  “the  labor  question  was  too  exciting,”  it  remained  in 
manuscript  until,  in  the  course  of  events,  a  more  progressive  pub¬ 
lisher  was  found.  In  its  preparation  the  plan  adopted  was  that 
j  of  twelve  parts,  each  of  which  should  contain  such  illustrative 
material  as  the  editor  should  either  find  or  prepare.  The  twelve 
parts  are  now  published  and  for  sale.  While  the  complete  trans¬ 
lation  of  M.  Godin’s  work  is  contained  in  eleven  of  the  parts,  the 
twelfth  part  is  an  admirable  and  complete  exposition  of  the  series 
of  social  solutions  proposed  by  the  Credit  Foncier  of  Sinaloa,  for 
the  organization  of  the  society  on  Topolobampo  Bay,  in  Sinaloa, 
Mexico,  which  has  been  gathered  by  the  Credit  Foncier  of  Sinaloa, 
a  paper  published  at  Hammonton,  New  Jersey,  at  $1.00  a  year. 


*  Social  Solutions,  published  in  12  parts  in  Lovell’s  Library,  prioe  10  cents 
each,  or  the  12  parts  for  $1.00. 


JOHN  W.  LOVELL  CO., 


1J=  and  16  Vesey  St.,  New  York. 


Opinions  of  Eminent  Men  about 

“MOONSHINE" 

By  FREDERIC  ALLISON  TTJPPER. 


1  vol.,  12mo,  Lovelies  Library,  No.  895.  20  Cents. 


JOHN  G.  WHITTIER  says  : 

“I  have  read  thy  story  of  ‘Moonshine’  with  a  great  deal  of  interest.  1 
should  judge  from  the  book  that  it  was  written  by  an  eye-witness  of  the 
scenes  it  so  graphically  deswibes .” 

GEN.  BENJAMIN  F.  BUTLER  says : 

“  It  takes  its  place  with  *  Uncle  Tom’s  Cabin,’  Post’s  story  ‘  From  Ocean  to 
Ocean,’  andTourgee’s  ‘  Fool’s  Errand,’  in  teaching  the  people  the  acts,  doings, 
and  feelings  of  each  section.  Accept  my  thanks  for  the  book  as  a  contribu¬ 
tion  to  the  truth  of  history .” 

SENATOR  JOHN  SHERMAN  says : 

“  I  have  read  the  book  with  interest  and  pleasure .” 

SENATOR  JOHN  A.  LOGAN  says : 

“It  seems  to  be  a  well-written  book  so  far  as  I  have  had  an  opportunity 
of  examining  it.” 

SENATOR  GEO.  B.  EDMUNDS  says : 

“  Scattered  paragraphs  that  I  have  read  interest  me  very  much." 

EX-SECRETARY  GEO.  S.  BOUTWELL  says  : 

“I  have  read  your  novel  entitled  ‘Moonshine,’  icith  great  interest.  Your 
picture  of  Southern  outrages  is  a  truthful  representation  as  far  as  it  relates 
to  the  illicit  distillation  and  sale  of  whiskey.” 


press  ncttices. 

“  ‘  Moonshine  ’  is  a  story,  not  of  the  moonshine  of  love  or  of  nonsense,  but 
of  the  tragic  moonshine  of  the  ‘  moonshiners.’  It  is  vividly  told  and  well 
written.  The  hero  is  not  the  typical  Northerner  who  used  to  go  South  and  re¬ 
turn  a  more  than  typical  Southerner;  but  a  Northerner  rather  inclined  to 
Democratic  and  Southern  ideals,  who  goes  South  and  returns  with  no  dis¬ 
position  ever  to  stray  again  from  his  native  heath.”— The  Critic. 

“The  story  is  well  written  and  has  power  in  causing  impressions  of  its 
fidelity  and  in  carrying  convictions  of  its  truth.  It  is  a  story  that  will  enter¬ 
tain  many  readers."— Boston  Globe. 

“Incidentally  it  affords  a  view  of  political  subversion  in  Alabama.  If  the 
ballot-box  throughout  the  country  were  juggled  with  and  polluted  as  it  is  in 
South  Carolina,  Florida,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  and  Louisiana,  the  Republic 
of  the  United  States  would  be  at  an  end.  It  is  plain  that  the  author  writes 
as  an  eye-witness." — Cincinnati  Commercial  Gazette. 

“A  sprightly  story,  graphic  in  description,  and  full  of  exciting  incidents .” 
—Chicago  Inter-Ocean. 

“  The  style  is  easy  and  graceful."— Chicago  Times. 

“  Told  with  much  vigor  and  shows  no  little  dramatic  power."— Zion's 
Herald. 

“  Full  of  life  and  incident."— Harvard  Crimson. 

“Mr.  Tupper  is  a  terse  writer,  clear  in  portrayal,  elevated  in  sentiment, 
and  graphic  in  description.”— Newton  (Mass.)  Transcript. 


JOHN  W.  LOVELL  COMPANY,  Publishers, 

14  and  16  Vesey  St.,  New  York. 


II.  RIDER  HAGGARD’S  NOVELS. 


SHE  :  A  HISTORY  OF  ADVENTURE.  i2mo.  Paper, 
20  cents. 

There  are  color,  splendor,  and  passion  everywhere ;  action  in  abundance  ;  con¬ 
stant  variety  and  absorbing  interest.  Mr.  Haggard  does  not  err  on  the  side  of 
niggardliness  ;  he  is  only  too  affluent  in  description  and  ornament.  .  .  .  There  is 

a  largeness,  a  freshness,  and  a  strength  about  him  which  are  firil  of  promise  and 
'  encouragement,  the  more  since  he  has  placed  himself  so  unmistakably  on  the  roman¬ 
tic  side  of  fiction  ;  that  is,  on  the  side  of  truth  and  permanent  value.  .  .  .  He  is 

already  one  of  the  foremost  modern  romance  writers. — N.  Y.  World. 

It  seems  to  me  that  Mr.  Haggard  has  supplied  to  us  in  this  book  the  complement 
of  “  Dr.  Jeckyl.”  He  has  shown  us  what  woman’s  love  for  man  really  means. —  The 
Journalist. 

One  cannot  too  much  applaud  Mr.  Haggard  for  his  power  in  working  up  to  a 
weird  situation  and  holding  the  reader  at  the  ghost-story  pitch  without  ever  abso¬ 
lutely  entering  the  realm  of  the  supernatural.  .  .  .  It  is  a  story  to  be  read  at 

one  sitting,  not  in  weekly  parts.  But  its  sensationalism  is  fresh  and  stirring  ;  its 
philosophy  is  conveyed  in  pages  that  glow  with  fine  images  and  charm  the  reader 
like  the  melodious  verse  of  Swinburne. — N.  Y.  Times. 

One  of  the  most  peculiar,  vivid,  and  absorbing  stories  we  have  read  for  a  long 
time. — Boston  Times. 

JESS.  A  Novel.  121110.  Paper,  20  cents. 

Mr.  Haggard  has  a  genius,  not  to  say  a  great  talent,  for  story-telling.  .  .  . 

Tha  t  he  should  have  a  large  circle  of  readers  in  England  and  this  country,  where  so 
many  are  trying  to  tell  stories  'with  no  stories  to  tell,  is  a  healthy  sign,  in  that  it 
shows  that  the  love  of  fiction,  pure  and  simple,  is  as  strong  as  it  was  in  the  days  of 
Dickens  and  Thackeray  and  Scott,  the  older  days  of  Smollett  and  Fielding,  and  the 
old,  old  days  of  Le  Sage  and  Cervantes. — IV.  Y  Mail  and  Express. 

This  bare  sketch  of  the  story  gives  no  conception  of  the  beauty  of  the  love- 
passages  between  Jess  and  Niel,  or  of  the  many  fine  touches  interpolated  by  the 
author. — St.  Lotiis  Reptiblican. 

Another  feast  of  South  African  life  and  marvel  for  those  who  revelled  in  “  She.” — 
Brooklyn  Eagle. 

The  story  has  special  and  novel  interest  for  the  spirited  reproduction  of  life,  char¬ 
acter,  scenes,  and  incidents  peculiar  to  the  Transvaal. — Boston  Advertiser. 

Mr.  Haggard  is  remarkable  for  his  fertility  of  invention.  .  .  .  The  story,  like 

the  rest  of  his  stories,  is  full  of  romance,  movement,  action,  color,  passion.  “  Jess” 
is  to  be  commended  because  it  is  what  it  pretends  to  be — a  story. — Philadelphia 
Times. 

KING  SOLOMON’S  MINES.  A  Novel.  i2mo.  Paper, 
20  cents. 

Few  stories  of  the  season  are  more  exciting  than  this,  for  it  contains  an  account 
of  the  discovery  of  the  legendary  mines  of  King  Solomon  in  South  Africa.  The 
style  is  quaint  and  realistic  throughout,  and  the  adventures  of  the  explorers  in  the 
land  of  the  Kukuana  are  full  of  stirring  incidents.  The  characters,  too,  are  vigor¬ 
ously  drawn. — News  and  Courier,  Charleston. 

This  novel  has  achieved  a  wonderful  popularity.  It  is  one  of  the  best  selling 
books  of  the  season,  and  it  deserves  its  great  success. —  Troy  Daily  Press. 

THE  WITCH’S  HEAD.  A  Novel.  i2mo.  Paper,  20  cents. 
DAWN.  A  Novel.  i2mo.  Paper,  20  cents. 

Published  by  JOHN  W.  LOVELL  COMPANY,  New  York. 

YW~ Any  0/ the  above  works  sent  by  mail,  postage  prepaid,  to  any  part  of  the 
United  States  or  Canada ,  on  receipt  of  the  price. 


Lovell's  Household  Library. 


This  admirable  series  of  Popular  Books  is  printed  on 
heavier  and  larger  paper  than  other  cheap  series,  and  is 
substantially  bound  in  an  attractive  cover. 

The  following  have  been  issued  to  date.  The  best  works 
of  new  fiction  will  be  added  as  rapidly  as  they  appear.  , 


1  A  Wicked  Girl,  by  M.  C.  Hay . 25 

2  The  Moonstone,  by  Collins . 25 

3  Moths,  by  Ouida . . 25 

4  Strange  Case  of  Dr.  Jekyll,  by  R.  L. 

Stevenson  ;  and  Faust  .  25 

5  Peck’s  Bad  Boy  and  his  Pa,  by  Geo. 

W.  Peck . 25 

6  Jane  Eyre,  by  Charlotte  Bront6  ...  .25 
i  7  Peck’s  Sunshine,  by  Geo.  W.  Peck.  .25 

8  Adam  Bede,  by  George  Eliot . .25 

9  Bill  Nye  and  Boomerang,  by  Bill 

Nye  Himself . 25 

10  What  Will  the  World  Say  ? . 25 

11  Lime  Kiln  Club,  by  M.  Quad . 25 

12  She,  by  H.  Rider  Haggard . 25 

13  Dora  Thorne,  by  B.  M.  Clay . 25 

14  File  No.  113,  by  E.  Gaboriau . 25 

15  Phyllis,  by  The  Duchess . 25 

16  Lady  Yal worth’s  Diamonds,  and  The 
Haunted  Chamber,  by  The  Duchess.  25 

17  A  House  Party,  and  A  Rainy  June, 

by  Ouida .  25 

18  Set  in  Diamonds,  by  B.  M.  Clay . 25 

19  Her  Mother’s  Sin,  by  B.  M.  Clay _ 25 

20  Other  People’s  Money,  by  Gaboriau. 25 

21  Airy  Fairy  Lilian,  by  The  Duchess.. 25 

22  In  Peril  of  His  Life,  by  Gaboriau _ 25 

23  The  Old  Mam’selle’s  Secret,  by  E.  A. 

Marlitt . ■ _ 25 

24  The  Guilty  River  and  The  New  Mag¬ 

dalen,  by  Wilkie  Collins . 25 

25  John  Halifax,  byMissMulock . 25 

26  Marjorie,  by  B.  M.  Clay . 25 

27  Lady  Audley’s  Secret,  by  Braddon . .  25 

28  Peck’s  Fun,  by  George  W.  Peck . 25 

29  Thorns  and  Orange  Blossoms,  by  B. 

M.  Clay .  25 

30  East  Lynne,  by  Mrs.  Wood . 25 

31  King  Solomon’s  Mines,  by  Haggard.. 25 

32  The  Witch’s  Head,  by  Haggard . 25 

33  The  Master  Passion,  by  Marryat ....  25 

34  Jess,  by  H.  Rider  Haggard . 25 

35  Molly  Bawn,  by  The  Duchess . 25 

36  Fair  Women,  by  Mrs.  Forrester _ 25 

37  The  Merry  Men,  by  Stevenson . 25 

38  Old  Myddleton’s  Money,  by  Hay _ 25 

39  Mrs.  Geoffrey,  by  The  Duchess . 25 

40  Hypatia,  by  Rev.  Charles  Kingsley. .  25 

41  What  Would  You  Do  Love  ? .  25 

42  Eli  Perkins, Wit,  Humor,  and  Pathos.25 


43  Heart  and  Science,  by  Collins . 25 

44  Baled  Hay,  by  Bill  Nye . . 25 

45  Harry  Lorrequer,  by  Lever . 25 

46  Called  Back  and  Dark  Days,  by  Hugh 

Conway . 25 

47  Endymion,  by  Benjamin  Disraeli _ 25 

48  Claribel’s  Love  Story,  by  B.  M.  Clay. 25 

49  Forty  Liars,  by  Bill  Nye . 25 

50  Dawn,  by  H.  Rider  Haggard . 25 

51  Shadow  of  a  Sin,  and  Wedded  and 

Parted,  by  B.  M.  Clay .  25 

52  Wee  Wifle,  by  Rosa  N.  Carey . 25 

53  The  Dead  Secret,  by  Collins . 25 

54  Count  of  Monte  Cristo,  by  Dumas... 50 

55  The  Wandering  Jew,  by  Sue . 50 

56  The  Mysteries  of  Paris,  by  Sue. ...  ..50 

57  Middlemarch,  by  George  Eliot . 50 

58  Scottish  Chiefs,  by  Jane  Porter . 50 

59  Under  Two  Flags,  by  Ouida . 50 

60  David  Copperfield,  by  Dickens  ...  50 

61  Monsieur  Lecoq,  by  Gaboriau . 50 

62  Springhaven,  by  R.  D.  Blackmore. .  .25 

63  Speeches  of  Henry  Ward  Beecher  on 

the  War . 50 

64  A  Tramp  Actor . 25 

65  20,000  Leagues  Under  the  Sea,  by 

Jules  Verne . 25 

66  Tour  of  the  World  in  80  Days,  by 

Jules  Verne . 25 

67  The  Golden  Hope,  by  Russell . 25 

68  Oliver  Twist,  by  Dickens . 25 

69  Lovell’s  Whim,  by  Shirley  Smith. . .  .25 

70  Allan  Quatermain,  by  Haggard..  .25 

71  The  Great  Hesper,  by  Frank  Barrett. 25 

72  As  in  a  Looking  Glass,  by  F.  C. 

Philips .  . 25 

73  This  Man’s  Wife,  by  G.  M.  Fenn _ 25 

74  Sabina  Zembra,  by  Wm.  Black . 25 

75  The  Bag  of  Diamonds,  by  G.  M.  Fenn.25 

76  £10,000,  by  T.  E.  Willson . 25 

77  Red  Spider,  by  S.  Baring-Gould _ 25 

78  On  the  Scent,  by  Lady  Margaret 

Majendie . 25 

79  Beforehand,  by  T.  L.  Meade . 25 

80  The  Dean  and  his  Daughter,  by  the 

author  of  “As  in  a  Looking  Glass.”25 

81  A  Modern  Circe,  by  The  Duchess _ 25 

82  Scheherazade,  by  Florence  Warden.25 

83  “  The  Duchess,”  by  The  Duchess.. .  .25 


JOHN  W.  LOVELL  COMPANY, 

14  and  16  Vesey  Street,  New  York. 


TEN  MILLION  DOLLARS  CAPITAL 

IS  NOW  ENGAGED  IN  THE 


It  is  an  organization  of  the  manufacturers  of  many  classes  of 
merchandise  and  thousands  of  private  families  who  reside  in  all 
parts  of  the  United  States,  who  have  acquired  some  confidence  in 
one  another,  and  trade  direct  between  themselves,  and  thus  effect  a 
large  saving  of  money  by  avoiding  the  middlemen’s  expenses,  profits, 
and  losses. 

All  business  by  correspondence  is  consolidated  and  transacted 
through  the  Members’  and  Manufacturers’  Central  Offices,  located 
at  68  Wall  Street,  and  14  and  16  Vesey  Street,  New  York  City. 

The  Association  involves  the  use  of  Ten  Million  Dollars  invested 
in  machinery  and  manufactured  stock,  and  at  least  five  thousand 
employees.  So  perfectly  is  this  vast  syndicate’s  systems  adjusted, 
that  each  member  gets  a  direct  benefit  of  the  whole  organization,  by 
saving  from  10  to  50  per  cent,  on  all  goods  purchased,  and  this 
without  assuming  any  responsibility  of  loss  or  making  one  obligation  ; 
while  on  the  other  hand,  each  manufacturer  sells  his  wares  for  spot 
cash,  and  only  in  such  quantities  as  their  high  grade,  quality,  and 
reputation  warrant. 

Every  twenty-four  hours  the  business  is  completed  and  not  a  dol¬ 
lar  remains  due  to  either  member  or  manufacturer.  Hence  the 
magnificent  achivements  resulting  after  two  years’  operations  of 
this  organization. 

Memberships  are  issued  to  persons,  good  for  the  exclusive  use  of 
their  families,  upon  payment  of  seventy-five  (75)  cents,  which  sum  is 
required  to  cover  the  expense  of  supplying  the  “Buyer’s  Guide  and 
Instructor,”  a  large  quarto  volume  of  250  pages,  sent  to  all  new 
members  free. 

Confidence  in  the  Association  is  needed  before  it  is  of  any  real 
benefit  to  you.  This  can  be  obtained  in  two  ways,  viz.:  1st,  Inquire 
among  your  neighbors  and  find  some  friend  who  has  had  dealings 
with  the  organization  ;  or  2d,  Venture  to  send  some  small  trial 
orders  and  judge  from  the  goods  received  whether  the  dealings  are 
fair  and  advantageous  to  you. 

Orders  for  goods  are  received  from  and  goods  sent  to  all  parts  of 
the  United  States,  with  Free  'Transportation  when  ten 
or  more  members  combine  or  club  their  orders,  the  freight  charges 
being  paid  by  the  Manufacturers  at  the  Central  Office. 

Apply  at  once,  and  make  all  remittances  for  either  merchandise  or 
membership  fees  payable  to 

A.  J.  BISHOP,  Conductor, 

People  s  Co-operative  Supply  Association, 

68  Wall  St,  and  14  &  16  Yesey  St.,  NEW  YORK  CITY. 


R.  D.  BLACKMORE’S  NOVELS. 


Mr.  Blackmore  always  writes  like  a  scholar  and  a  gentleman. — 
Athenaeum London. 

His  descriptions  are  wonderfully  vivid  and  natural.  His  pages  are 
brightened  everywhere  with  great  humor ;  the  quaint,  dry  turns  of 
thought  remind  you  occasionally  of  Fielding. — London  Times. 

His  tales,  all  of  them,  are  pre-eminently  meritorious.  They  are 
remarkable  for  their  careful  elaboration,  the  conscientious  finish  of  their 
workmanship,  their  affluence  of  striking  dramatic  and  narrative  inci¬ 
dent,  their  close  observation  and  general  interpretation  of  nature,  their 
profusion  of  picturesque  description,  and  their  quiet  and  sustained 
humor.  Besides,  they  are  pervaded  by  a  bright  and  elastic  atmosphere 
which  diffuses  a  cheery  feeling  of  healthful  and  robust  vigor.  While 
they  charm  us  by  their  sprightly  vivacity  and  their  naturalness,  they 
never  in  the  slightest  degree  transcend  the  limits  of  delicacy  or  good  taste. 
While  radiating  warmth  and  brightness,  they  are  as  pure  as  the  new- 
fallen  snow.  .  .  .  Their  literary  execution  is  admirable,  and  their 

dramatic  power  is  as  exceptional  as  their  moral  purity. — Christian  Intel¬ 
ligencer ,  N.  Y. 

ALICE  LORRAINE.  A  Tale  of  the  South  Downs. 
12mo,  Paper,  20  cents. 

CHRISTO  WELL.  12mo,  Paper,  20  cents. 

CLARA  VAUGHAN.  12mo,  Paper,  20  cents. 

CRADOCK  NOWELL.  12mo,  Paper,  Two  Parts,  each 
20  cents. 

CRIPPS,  THE  CARRIER.  A  Woodland  Tale.  12mo, 
Paper,  20  cents. 

EREMA ;  Or,  My  Father’s  Sin.  12mo,  Paper,  20  cents. 

LORNA  DOONE.  12mo,  Paper, Two  Parts,  each  20  cents. 

MARY  ANERLEY.  A  Yorkshire  Tale.  12mo,  Paper,  20 
cents. 

SPRINGHAVEN.  A  Tale  of  the  Great  War.  12  mo,  Paper, 
20  cents. 

THE  MAID  OF  SKER.  12mo,  Paper,  20  cents. 

THE  REMARKABLE  HISTORY  OF  SIR  THOMAS 
UPMORE,  BART,  M.P.  12mo,  Paper,  20  cents. 

JOHN  W.  LOVELL  COMPANY, 

14  and  16  Vesey  Street,  New  York. 


Established  1836 


LINDEMAN 


PIANOFORTES 


WAREROOMS,  146  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York. 


FACTORY,  401-419  E.  Eighth  Street,  New  York. 


LINDEMAN  &,  SONS,  Manufacturers. 


THE  NEW  NOVEL 


“THE  DUCHESS5’ 

By  THE  J)  VC  HESS, 

Author  of  “  Molly  Bawn,”  “  Phyllis,” 
etc.,  etc.. 

Is  the  best  of  this  popular  writer’s 
works,  and  is  having  an  enormous  sale. 

No.  1072  Lovell’s  Library, 
Price,  20  Cents. 

JOHN  W.  LOVELL  CO.,  Publishers, 

14  &  16  Vesey  Street,  New  York. 


A  CLEAR  COMPLEXION ! 

West  63cl  St.,  N.  Y.,  lady  writes: 
‘‘I  found  Dr.  Campbell’s  Arsenic 
Complexion  Wafers  did  all  you  guar¬ 
anteed  they  would  do.  I  was  delicate 
from  the  effects  of  malaria,  could  not 
sleep  or  eat,  and  had  a  ‘  WRETCHED 
COMPLEXION;’  but  NOW  all  is 
changed.  I  not  only  sleep  and  eat 
well,  but  my  complexion  is  the  envy 
and  talk  of  my  lady  friends.  You  may 
refer  to  me.”  (Name  and  address  fur¬ 
nished  to  ladies.)  By  mail,  50c.  and 
$  1.00  ;  samples,  25c.  Harmless.  Pre¬ 
pared  ONLY  by 

JAS.  P.  CAMPBELL,  M.D., 
146  West  16th  Street,  N.  Y. 

Sold  by  Druggists. 


- “GUEE— 

SICK  HEADACHE ! 

BY  USING  THE  GENUINE 

Dr.  0.  McLane’s 

LIYER  PILLS 

PRICE,  25  CENTS. 

FOR  SALE  BY  ALL  DRUGGISTS. 

side  wrapper  from  a  box  of  the 
genuine  Dr.  C.  McLANE’S  Cele¬ 
brated  Liver  Pills,  with  your 
address,  plainly  written,  and  we 
will  send  you,  by  return  mail,  a 
magnificent  package  of  Chromatic 
and  Oleograpliic  Cards.  BHasiEisSSB 

FLEMING  BROS. 
PITTSBURCH,  PA. 


CANDY 


CANDY 


Send  *1.25,  $2.25, 
$3.50,  or  $5.00  for  a 
sample  retail  box,  by 
express,  prepaid,  of 
the  Best  CANDIES 
in  America.  Strictly 
pure,  and  put  up  in 
elegant  boxes.  Suit¬ 
able  for  presents. 
Refers  to  all  Chicago. 
Try  it.  Address, 

C.  F.  GUNTHER, 

Confectioner , 

212  State  St.,  and 
78  Madison  St., 
CHICAGO. 


FACE,  HANDS,  FEET, 

and  all  their  imperfec¬ 
tions,  including  Facial 
Development,  Hair  and 
Scalp,  Superfluous 
Hair,  Birth  Marks, 
Moles,  Warts,  Moth, 
Breckles,  Red  Nose,  Acne,  Black 
Heads,  Scars,  Pitting,  and  their 
treatment.  Send  10c.  for  book  of 
50  pages,  4th  edition. 

Dr.  JOHN  H.  WOODBURY, 

37  North  Pearl  St.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

6  parlors— 3  for  ladies.  Established  1870. 


HOSTETTER’S 

STOMACH  BITTERS 

HAS  FOR  35  YEARS  BEEN 

Adopted  by  Physicians  and  Invalids, 


AS  A  REMEDY  FOR 

Indigestion,  Dyspepsia, 

Fever  and  Ague,  Malaria, 
Neuralgia,,  Rheumatism, 

General  Debility, 
And  other  KINDRED  DISEASES, 


AS  CONFIRMED  BY 

THOUSANDS  OF  TESTIMONIALS  IN 
OUR  POSSESSION. 

Ash  your  Druggist  for  it,  and  take  none  but 

HOSTETTER’S  STOMACH  BITTERS. 


lectric  Corsets  and  Belts. 

Corsets,  $1.00,  $1.50,  $2.00,  $3.00.  Belts,  $3.00.  Nursing  Corset, 
Price,  $1.50.  Abdominal  Corset,  Price,  $3.00. 

Seventeen  thousand  families  in  the  City  of  New  York  alone  are  now  wearing 
them  daily.  Every  Man  and  Women,  well  or  ill,  should  daily 
wear  either  the  Corset  or  Belt. 

OUR  CORSETS  ARE  DOUBLE  STITCHED  AND  WILL  NOT  RIP. 

If  you  have  any  pain,  ache,  or  ill-feeling  from  any  cause,  if  you  seem  “  pretty  well,”  yet  lack 
energy  and  do  not  “feel  up  to  the  mark,”  if  you  sufferfrom  disease,  we  beg  you  to  tit  once  try  these 
remarkable  curatives.  They  cannot  and  do  not  injure  like  medicine.  Always  doing  good,  never 
harm.  There  is  no  shock  or  sensation  felt  in  wearing  them.  Every  mail  brings  us  testimonials 
like  the  following  : 

We  guarantee  safe  delivery  into 
your  hands.  Remit  in  Post-Office 
Money-order,  Draft,  Check,  or  in  Cur¬ 
rency  by  Registered  Letter  at  our 
risk.  In  ordering  kindly  mention 
Lovell's  Library,  and  state  exact 
size  of  corset  usually  worn.  Make 
all  remittances  payable  to  GEO. 
A.  SCOTT,  842  BROADWAY, 
New  York. 

N.  B. — Each  article  is 
V  stamped  with  the  English 

coat-of-arms,  and  the 
name  of  the  Proprie- 
47.  tors,  THE  PALL 
VVV  MALL  ELECT- 
R  I  C  ASSOCIA¬ 
TION. 


The  Celebrated  Dr.  W.  A. 
HAMMOND,  of  New  York,  formerly 
Surgeon-General  of  the  U  S.  Army, 
lately  lectured  upon  this  subject,  and 
advised  all  medical  men  to  make 
trial  of  these  agencies,  describing  at 
the  same  time  most  remarkable 
cures  he  had  made,  even  in  cases 
which  would  seem  hopeless. 

The  Corsets  do  not  differ 
in  appearance  from  those 
usually  worn.  They  are 
elegant  in  shape  and 
finish,  made  after  the 
best  French  pattern, 
and  warranted  satisfac¬ 
tory  in  ever;'  respect. 

Our  Belts  for  both  gents 
and  ladies  are  the  gen¬ 
uine  Dr.  Scott’s  and  are 
reliable. 

The  prices  are  as 
follows:  $1,  $1.50,  $2 
and  $3  for  the  Cor¬ 
sets,  and  $3  each 
for  the  Belts.  The 
accompanying  cut 
represents  our  No. 

2.  or  $1.50  Corset. 

We  have  also  a 
beautiful  French  shap¬ 
ed  Sateen  Corset  at  $3, 
also  a  fine  Sateen  Abdom 
inal  Corset  at  $3,  and  a  short 
Sateen  Corset  at  $2.  The  $1 
and  $1.50  goods  are  made  of 
fine  Jean,  elegant  in  shape, 
strong  and  durable.  Nur¬ 
sing  Corsets,  $1.50;  Miss¬ 
es,  75c.  All  are  double 
stitched.  Gents’  and 
Ladies’  Belts,  $3  each  ; 

Ladies’  Abdominal 
Supporter,  an  invalu¬ 
able  article,  $12.  They 
are  sent  out  in  a  hand¬ 
some  box,  accompanied  by  a 
silver-plated  compass  by  which 
the  Electro-Magnetic  influence 
can  be  tested.  If  you  cannot 
find  them  in  your  dry  goods 
store,  remit  to  us  direct.  We 
will  send  either  kind  to  any 
address,  post-paid,  on  receipt 
of  price,  with  20  cents  added 
for  packing  and  postage. 


Hollis  Centre,  Me. 

I  suffered  severely  from  back 
trouble  for  years  and  found  no 
relief  till  I  wore  Dr.  Scott’s  Elec¬ 
tric  Corsets.  They  cured  me, 
and  I  would  not  be  without 
them.  Mrs.  PI.  D.  BENSON. 


tf  L 

5°Iob§£T 


Chambersburg,  Pa. 

I  found  Dr.  Scott’s  Electric  Cor¬ 
sets  possessed  miraculous  power 
in  stimulating  and  invigorating  my 
enfeebled  body,  and  the  Hair 
Brush  had  a  magic  effect  on  my 
scalp.  Mrs.  t.  E.  Snyder, 
Fancy  Goods  Dealer. 


Memphis,  Tennessee. 
Dr.  Scott’s  Electric  Corsets 
have  given  me  much  relief.  I 
suffered  four  years  with  breast 
trouble,  without  finding  any 
benefit  from  other  remedies. 
They  are  invaluable. 

Mrs.  Jas.  Campbell. 

De  Witt,  N.  Y. 

I  have  an  invalid  sis¬ 
ter  who  had  not  been 
dressed  for  a  year. 
She  has  worn  Dr. 
Scott’s  Electric 
Corsets  for  two 
weeks,  and  is  now 
able  to  be  dressed 
and  sit  up  most  ot 
the  time. 

MELVA  J.  DOB. 


Newark,  N.  Y. 

Dr.  Scott’s  Electric  Corsets 
have  entirely  cured  me  of  mus¬ 
cular  rheumatism,  and  also  of 
severe  case  of  headache. 

Mrs.  L.  C.  Spencer. 


Dr.  Scott’s  Electric  Hair  Brushes,  $1.00,  $1.50,  $2.00,  $2.50,  $3.00;  Flesh 
Brushes,  $3.00  ;  Dr.  Scott’s  Electric  Tooth  Brushes,  50  cents ;  Insoles, 

50  cents;  CHEST  PROCTECTOR,  $3.00;  ELECTRIC  HAIR 
CURLER,  50  cents;  LUNG  AND  NERVE  INVIGORA- 
TORS,  $5.00  and  $10.00. 

IHF”  A  Good  Live  Canvassing  Agent  WANTED  In 
your  town  for  these  splendidly  advertised  and 
LIBERAL  PAY,  QUICK  SALES.  Satisfae* 
GEO.  A.  SCOTT,  842  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


A  GREAT  SUCCESS  ... 

best  selling  goods  in  the  market, 
tion  guaranteed.  Apply  at  once. 


